Operation Rainfall

Magus · 07-23-2011, 07:53 PM

Hmm, for some reason I dislike the idea of the Mother 4 game almost instinctually when I didn't have a problem with the idea of a Crimson Echoes game or the King's Quest: Silver Lining game. I dunno if it's the fact that they are sticking a number in there, that the Mother games are so inextricably bound up with Shigesato Itoi's personal ideas and creativity, or simply the fact that it has only been like three years since I personally played it, and only five since it was created How is that "sitting" on an idea? I think that's a pretty poor argument for making one yourself, that Nintendo hasn't made a Mother game in five years. They seem to really be jumping the gun. So Itoi said he isn't going to make another game--that's quite possibly not true. Can we at least wait a while before getting antsy and trying to do it ourselves, internet? If it is even a good idea (probably not).

On a different note, though, regarding that cartoon, as for the "Prequel to Treasure Island", I see absolutely no problem with writing books involving historical classics of literature and playing around with them. Why is it okay to write dozens of books involving the Bram Stoker version of Dracula but not Long John Silvers? I'm confused. I know it's a minor point from that pretty long comic but there's a big difference between adding to a classic novel that has been used and abused by everyone and choosing out a mid-1900's novel whose author is still alive. Does that artist hate Alan Moore? I think "classic" characters are wide open, not only legally but pretty much ethically. Otherwise we'd have to get pissed about The Three Musketeers being adapted as a steampunk fantasy movie or Bill Murray being adapted as a modern day Scrooge.

Catcher in the Rye was written only a little while ago on the scale of things, plus Salinger still legally owns the copyright, and is clearly alive as well. People will have to wait many years before they can play around with that story and characters.

EDIT: Also, if Kanye West did want to "finish" the work of a Greek philosopher two thousand years dead, why is that intrinsically "horrible", anyway? It would only be horrible if it sucked, because it would be a poor tribute to the original philosopher. Same thing with that Treasure Island prequel.

BTW I have the feeling that cartoonist is unaware how deeply entrenched fanfiction is in the literary world. Basically every classic novel has been "ripped off" (I prefer to say "expanded upon" or "commented upon" or "deconstructed", but anyway), not only by authors but by movie studios, etc. The only difference is that the internet fanfiction writers are 1. by and large not very good writers (which is also true of all the writers in the world, it is just that the internet makes it so easy to simply put up what you have written for everyone to see), and 2. they pick more recent stories that are still legally protected.

07-23-2011, 07:53 PM	#11
Magus Archer and Armstrong vs. the World Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 7,164	Hmm, for some reason I dislike the idea of the Mother 4 game almost instinctually when I didn't have a problem with the idea of a Crimson Echoes game or the King's Quest: Silver Lining game. I dunno if it's the fact that they are sticking a number in there, that the Mother games are so inextricably bound up with Shigesato Itoi's personal ideas and creativity, or simply the fact that it has only been like three years since I personally played it, and only five since it was created How is that "sitting" on an idea? I think that's a pretty poor argument for making one yourself, that Nintendo hasn't made a Mother game in five years. They seem to really be jumping the gun. So Itoi said he isn't going to make another game--that's quite possibly not true. Can we at least wait a while before getting antsy and trying to do it ourselves, internet? If it is even a good idea (probably not). On a different note, though, regarding that cartoon, as for the "Prequel to Treasure Island", I see absolutely no problem with writing books involving historical classics of literature and playing around with them. Why is it okay to write dozens of books involving the Bram Stoker version of Dracula but not Long John Silvers? I'm confused. I know it's a minor point from that pretty long comic but there's a big difference between adding to a classic novel that has been used and abused by everyone and choosing out a mid-1900's novel whose author is still alive. Does that artist hate Alan Moore? I think "classic" characters are wide open, not only legally but pretty much ethically. Otherwise we'd have to get pissed about The Three Musketeers being adapted as a steampunk fantasy movie or Bill Murray being adapted as a modern day Scrooge. Catcher in the Rye was written only a little while ago on the scale of things, plus Salinger still legally owns the copyright, and is clearly alive as well. People will have to wait many years before they can play around with that story and characters. EDIT: Also, if Kanye West did want to "finish" the work of a Greek philosopher two thousand years dead, why is that intrinsically "horrible", anyway? It would only be horrible if it sucked, because it would be a poor tribute to the original philosopher. Same thing with that Treasure Island prequel. BTW I have the feeling that cartoonist is unaware how deeply entrenched fanfiction is in the literary world. Basically every classic novel has been "ripped off" (I prefer to say "expanded upon" or "commented upon" or "deconstructed", but anyway), not only by authors but by movie studios, etc. The only difference is that the internet fanfiction writers are 1. by and large not very good writers (which is also true of all the writers in the world, it is just that the internet makes it so easy to simply put up what you have written for everyone to see), and 2. they pick more recent stories that are still legally protected. __________________ The Valiant Review Last edited by Magus; 07-23-2011 at 08:09 PM.