Pressing the Action Button (108+2077)

hellojed

Gaagaagiins I’ll only accept a fakeout if he goes to the camera and says “Face it, you didn’t finish earthbound, you played the first hour or so on an emulator and then didn’t finish it!” which is what ~~a lot of people do.~~ I did!

thebryanjzx90

Mother 3 yes. Earthbound no that was my most anticipated game for the entire summer it was released and I did everything I could in that game. Nintendo Power’s weird marketing scheme somehow worked exactly as planned on me. I remember in particular a family vacation in Seattle that summer and fantasizing that I would get to pick a destination and that my family would all go to Nintendo of America HQ on my suggestion and that as part of the tour of the facilities I would get a copy of Earthbound right there.

hellojed

thebryanjzx90 I remember in particular a family vacation in Seattle that summer and fantasizing that I would get to pick a destination and that my family would all go to Nintendo of America HQ on my suggestion and that as part of the tour of the facilities I would get a copy of Earthbound right there.

I mean, who among us has not fantasized about this? Sometimes I still go by NOA in Redmond and get a little chill just looking at the building

whatsarobot

hellojed lol I have done this same thing in Kyoto at Nintendo HQ (on multiple occasions), and may or may not have forced a colleague to take a photo of me paying homage from across the street (only once).

Gaagaagiins

Earthbound for all of my childhood was “the one with the bigass box that was only at that one video store I didn’t usually go to.” Oh man, it had a vaguely racist name and possibly a racist logo/mascot? I think it was called Bandito Video…

Okay I looked it up, it was Bandito Video and the logo was at least 4/10 racist which is very appropriate for the 90s I guess:

With an entire country between you and Mexico I suppose you can get away with that.

Anyway. For some reason I vaguely recall my little kid peabrain being convinced that Earthbound required the Super Nintendo Mouse to play. And even though I had Mario Paint and had a Super Nintendo Mouse, I thought I wouldn’t be able to play it? Maybe I thought it required some other peripheral (hence the huge ass box which must have contained an incredible treasure). And I also very vaguely recall thinking because the box was so big it was some peripheral dependent gimmick game so it wasn’t gonna be that interesting, or, that the video store wouldn’t have the peripheral, or asking to rent it and always being told it was out (and the only had one copy because, you know, the box is big and important). I think maybe also the Starman on the boxart scared me, and it was kept on top of the regular shelves (big box) and so I guess I couldn’t see Ness up there. At any rate, I was only four years old when Earthbound came out and I didn’t really have the brain capacity to understand JRPGs until maybe around or a stretch of time after the release of Super Mario RPG, I remember losing my goddamn mind at the idea of one of those with Mario in it, I think that was probably my earliest favourite game or certainly at least the first game I was truly obsessed with.

All of that to say that yes, I didn’t play Earthbound until I was a teenager or possibly in my 20s, it was on an emulator, but I did make it all the way to Fourside.

Syzygy

Tim did write a big Mother 2 review but I won’t disrespect his efforts to scrub old work by revealing where to look for it.

thom

There is some super interesting stuff in this thread, and I can never hope to fully consume all of it. Thanks everyone for sharing. I have… I guess I’d have to call it the privilege of watching Tim’s videos without feeling a lot of the negative reactions described here. I don’t think I have any useful comments in any direction about the jackets, the PC, the stories, et al. But I really feel the sentiment behind a lot of the statements here. Anyway, thanks again.

exodus

I haven’t watched the video yet (I will eventually) but I don’t really understand people being upset about tim having money and folks paying for what he does. Capitalism sucks, I think we mostly agree on that, but tim had been living close to the poverty line for so long I think it’s okay for him to not have to worry about that aspect at least. it puts more pressure on him, sure, but he’ll figure that out. To that point though, I feel a lot better about him getting that amount of money than if, for example, I got that amount of money. I’d feel guilty about it!

also, not to get too far into it, but don’t forget that tim is indeed a real human being. I think he gets into a tough spot because he externalizes a lot of things other folks have internalized and would like to see given voice, so when his actions or feelings don’t match with the viewer’s internalized expectations it winds up disappointing them. There’s no real way to solve that, it’s kind of the niche he’s put himself in, so… hopefully everyone will have a good think about it and that’ll be okay.

LeFish

I’ve not watched the whole thing yet, just parts 0, 5, and 6. There are an awful lot of things that I could say about it from what I’ve watched so far. I can see why for a lot of people they wouldn’t want to sit through the best part of 10 hours to watch the whole thing (which is actively discouraged in the first place) but it’s not an argument that I find especially strong considering the ease of sitting through any television show or playing any videogame for a similar length of time, even if cumulatively speaking.

As with all of Tim’s Action Button videos I have nothing but total admiration for someone who has such a singular vision for what he wants to create within the resource and medium he’s been given, and to examine a videogame with a simultaneously surgical level of focus and a perpendicularly tangential degree of sidetracking is, given some replies here, thorough to a frustrating fault.

That said, I really hope that he disciplines himself more with the recognition of how much he’s overworked himself, and dials things down a bit for season 2. You can tell that this is such a passion project for him, and to be able to make the waves he does in a sea of otherwise fairly disposable videos about videogames is a privilege for the people that want to return each time and take the time to sit down with what he creates.

siebold_magnolia

It is interesting to read the different interpretations of the videos given Tim’s summit towards Internet Celebritydom, at least within the Video Game circles. Regarding the money aspect, money is always weird - I suppose I can see how many would find dissonance between a critical look at anything Cyberpunk within today’s context and the applauding of expensive and “capitalistic” luxury articles of clothing. Money is tough to talk about given the current divisive views of it these days, I think. Tim is more than blessed to be able to afford all that he does, and I believe he is deservedly in that position to spend money on things that matter to him. I really enjoyed the opportunity to hear about the brands and stories he finds powerful and important, because that is something that is hard to find in our current “cyberpunk” 2021 attempt at Capitalism.

I appreciate him sharing these as I will one day perhaps hope to save up for a nice jacket or watch like these. Heck, one day if I find myself able to, perhaps even I will save up to own multiple of these if I think that is what I wish to do. As stated above, Tim is a human, I think he would rather that be highlighted than any other observation of his wit, verbose nature, or near eidetic memory. Not wanting to be a carbon copy of whatever the “machine” spews out is a logical reaction to any “cyberpunk dystopia” and few of us are immune to the desire to be an individual. And come on, he does look quite dapper in his fashion choices, I would not mind looking a bit more put together as I approach my 30s even.

Appreciate these other views though, excited to continue to read into them. I think Discourse is the best thing we can get out of whatever is left of an “Internet Community” and I am enjoying it thoroughly here with you all.

JoJoestar

There is always a real human being behind any piece of media and that is something that is advised to always be kept in mind, specially in this case, where there is some adjacency to Tim himself and we are in the presence a lot of people who are close friends with him and could feel hurt by our comments. I truly hope nothing of what I said made anyone feel bad. At the very least, I tried to frame my observations here considering that, and thinking if the person himself would be hurt if he read my comments (I’d like to think I did a good job and that it would be seen as constructive criticism).

To offer a more positive outlook, I support Tim’s Patreon and will continue to do it in the foreseeable future, at least while I can afford it. The fact that I didn’t like this particular review hasn’t changed that. Personally, I’m happy that Tim gets to live in comfort and own an awesome gaming PC, he clearly worked his ass off with this thing, not only with the Cyberpunk video but the whole season and he has been very open with all the technical and health difficulties he has been through the whole process. I feel it’s very selfish to be mad or demand something from him under the circumstances. I do hope he is… less ostentatious of his material possessions and tries to sell less T-shirts on future videos (even if it’s meant as a rhetorical device), but that’s a different topic. Tim Rogers has a unique voice in the videogame space and that is something to be appreciated and cherished.

yeso

speculation about the personal life and morality of someone publishing art/media is not a real valid route of enquiry. But part of what makes me uncomfortable with the approach in the review, is how much the author in this case weaves in personal disclosure and personal relation to the material, so it’s very hard to critique without appearing to make a personal attack, and it’s especially uncomfortable because this person’s friends post here + we all like the podcast and community and would like the person to not feel unwelcome to come back and contribute more. So it feels weird to me to say anything about it, which isn’t a great outcome for an elaborate piece of criticism unfortunately. It’s not really a case of anyone doing anything wrong, more a matter of the fuzzy boundaries involved in this newish and not yet well defined method of production/publishing and relation to an audience

I will say that I don’t buy the arguments floated here about the struggles of apparently being compelled to buy expensive things and work to the point of hospitalization on a video game review, or about alienation related to video games and internet culture. None of that is compulsory. Apologies if I sound like a simple-minded hard ass but people can go deliver meals on wheels or help out at a homeless shelter or something. I’m allowed to not care about a creator’s personal life, right? I can just engage with what they make, that’s still ok?

whatsarobot

yeso Without even addressing the other, interrogation-worthy points you raise, I will say that

I’m allowed to not care about a creator’s personal life, right? I can just engage with what they make, that’s still ok?

this is an essential aspect of separating art from artist.

exodus

yeso it does sound like I should watch the video to hear what he’s talking about with this!

gouis

whatsarobot

The thing is “separating art form artist” now seems to be an outdated idea. I am not that old, but it was a central tenant when I was in college and discussing ideas. With the younger generation this seems to have gone entirely out the window. No judgement on which is ‘better’ (for example people refusing to watch new Woody Allen movies is probably a good thing) but it’s an interesting development.

yeso

I don’t think it’s outdated, I just think people who spend too much time reading on the computer and posting don’t get it

also part of the parasocial content $$ doctrine requires that line to be blurred. It’s horrible for art but lucrative for “engagement”

And of course people familiar with the doctrine via a liberal arts degree are a small section of the population by numbers so it may not be a common idea outside of that group

It’s still the right idea though, I think

gouis

yeso

I never thought about ‘separate art from artist’ being a thing from liberal arts colleges, but perhaps you’re right. I got a science degree but at a small liberal arts college so that tracts.

siebold_magnolia

Our relationship to “content” has also changed. The lines between opinion, art, and humanity all blur when collectively referred to as “content” that we can consume and pay for (or not). Assuming this perhaps it is easy for the separation of art and artist to become difficult, perhaps even incentivized beyond possibility, as our identities can so easily become brands now, we hold others to a similar metric, maybe.

Full disclosure, my undergrad was a Liberal Arts school, and a Buddhist one at that, and although “separating the art from the artist” was quite a common trope mentioned in discussions, it seemed few people were willing to put that into practice in a contemporary context.

yeso

siebold_magnolia my understanding of the concept isn’t a denial of an author (I know you’re not suggesting this is what the concept dictates) but that the artwork is a distinct aesthetic object. My main example of this thinking is Keats on trying to regard a work of art like he would some object/experience as encountered in the natural world. It’s something that yes, has a genesis, but it’s also just kind of out there

JoJoestar

Right exactly it’s a flexible concept and people have different personal levels of tolerance for whatever is connected to the work or its author. And there are exceptions where the utility of marginalizing a work is better than having it in a position of real influence. It’s healthier for the turner diaries or camp of saints to be consigned to the hateful slime shadows

yeso

siebold_magnolia content

part of this is audience reception frame, but it’s also on the author to set boundaries, and streaming and social media-ing renders something “content” when it’s couched in that flow, rather than just a published work that speaks for itself and the author david lynch style just doesn’t remark on it

JoJoestar

It’s not a perfectly binary black/white right or wrong line to navigate either. You can put some distance between the art and the artist while also considering that under certain circumstances is morally irresponsible supporting certain things, I think. A good example is the Five nights at Freddy’s dude actively pumping money into transphobe and racist political candidates’ campaigns.

On the other hand, I can find certain creators dislikeable (Tarantino) but, as long as it is a personal disliking, as in “I don’t particularly enjoy this guy’s vibes but some of his movies are cool” type of situation I don’t feel bad watching his stuff (although that Uma Thurman situation was… yucky). The opposite is also possible of course, John Carpenter is the coolest man alive on Earth, who also happens to be responsible for some really mediocre films.

What I dislike the most of the current internet culture and climate is the constant push for absolute, clear cut opinions/thoughts/answers. Nuances and the willingness to engage in conversations while acknowledging problems, contradictions and the idea that some debates and discussions are necessarily shaded and require some gradation to properly navigate is discouraged and that is, at least for me, very concerning. You have to either idolize or cancel individuals, every thought must be expeditious and categorical, bonus points if you manage to make it fit in less than 280 characters. I mean, I feel like the reason why a lot of us engage and participate in this forum is because this is a space that allows for an escape route, while also allowing for the good parts of connecting and becoming friends with people on the other side of the planet that the internet always had.

sabertoothalex

yeso It’s something that yes, has a genesis, but it’s also just kind of out there

This is something that I continually struggle with! I find it really hard to view a lot of stuff like this sometimes, especially when artists’ personal lives, political contributions, etc are now made public. A lot of the time by their own choice!

I don’t know. There’s art in my life that was important at one point, I’m specifically thinking Harry Potter and Ender’s Game, that has been recolored by their author’s behavior and beliefs. I can’t think about Harry Potter anymore(not that I do much anyway, I am 31 years old) without thinking about Rowling’s aggressively regressive worldview. And it’s reflected in her writing too! I just didn’t really see it as a child. Orson Scott Card has homophobic views and I don’t read anything he puts out anymore. Ender’s Game and Shadow were my favorite books growing up though! I’ve read each of them a dozen times. Do those books reflect this specific aspect of himself that I find repulsive? Maybe. I’ve thought about the scene where Ender kills Bonzo, a naked boy who is trying to physically attack Ender in the shower. Weird subtext maybe? I don’t really think so but that kind of stuff makes me think, at least. And personally I think that’s mostly good. Being able to view art in context of the creator and their beliefs can help you grow and analyze yourself and the art you take in.

So what I think about sometimes is how do you put that toothpaste back in the tube? Should you even? Does it actually matter? Is it better to just try to not let this stuff affect you? Like you’ve said I guess that’s just up to each individual to decide for themselves. I think I might come down on it a little more hard than a lot of posters in this thread(though def not as hardline as people who get on Twitter and act like an MCU director or w/e has personally victimized them with some dumb thing lol). And that’s fine! I like reading your perspectives on this and being challenged to think about it in a different way.

« Previous Page Next Page »