What if Archie had started out with X instead of Mega Man?

Forum devoted to Mega Man by Archie Comics.

Re: What if Archie had started out with X instead of Mega Ma

Postby DoNotDelete » Thu May 07, 2015 3:51 am

Gauntlet101010 wrote:It sounds like you just like the X series more and would have liked it to have a series instead of what we got. Which is fair enough. I'd have bought it, especially to see how a real story-driven approach could have helped the plot point I think the X series as a whole failed to deliver. But I don't think the X series is better than the Classic series, nor do I think it'd lead itself to better stories. The X series is just as formulaic as the Classic. Fight 8 bosses, fight in a fortress, end on Sigma, wash, rinse, repeat.

For the most part this is true and I freely state it in my introductory post. I suppose really I prefer the X series more from an illustrative standpoint. The Reploid and Animaloid designs - though still highly stylised - do more for me personally than the more 'Astro Boy' stylings of the classic series.


Mordum wrote:It is a superfluous alteration because it means the exact same as the word "regardless." You're needlessly adding two letters without really modifying its meaning and the entire word's existence is superfluous. It's not even really a synonym, which is usually developed and built out of slightly different contexts, and there's no context where two more letters for no modified meaning is actually necessary. Its continued existence and usage is really only insisted by people who erroneously used it at first and only argue its value for the sake of being obstinate, such as how you're being now.

Also, because of that response, I'm not being nice anymore. You're being obnoxious.

I'm not going to get into an intellectual posturing contest with you over the use of a single word. If you don't like people using it - fine, that's your bag, but find someone else to play this game with because I'm really not interested.

As I see it it's no more harmful to the English language than having 'flammable' and 'inflammable' explain the exact same material properties - that the dictionary for some reason turns its nose up at a word like 'irregardless' and not 'inflammable' is just another one of those all too prevalent inconsistencies in the English language wordbase.

Mordum wrote:
Megaman Wiki wrote:Epsilon masterminded the revolt on Gigantis Island and is the leader of the Rebellion Forces. Proud and relaxed, he is usually very stoic and quiet, his presence accentuated in this vein by his unprecedented (for a Reploid) African features. Epsilon was the only Reploid to survive the Supra-Force Metal infusion experiments, giving him heightened intelligence and strength capabilities. All other volunteers in the experiment either went mad (Maverick) or perished outright

I like that the only black guy in the series is the one who only gets intelligence and strength from the society that's already oppressing him. That's not at all shady and racist, and certainly trying to relate the struggle of Reploids, characters who are cute, cartoon robots who we're repeatedly told have free will only for the core conflict to come from them being reprogrammed and infected by viruses that make them unambiguously evil to the struggles of black people in times of oppression and slavery is in no way reductive, oversimplified, insulting, or condescending.

...

Epsilon is a morally complex black man in a game series where you've been rewarded, for eight games in a row, for killing his minority group.

I think - on the internet especially - people are too quick to look for a sensationalist racism angle based off the colour of a character's skin and overlook the simple truth that sometimes a black man is just a black man.

Sure, there are race-issue-oriented parallels to be found within the context of the Reploid world if you're looking for them really hard - but at the same time you're arguing this is a game for babies that pretends to have depth, you're also asking that we acknowledge deep ideological meanings.

If you want to open that can of worms it's all on you. I'm not going there.

Mordum wrote:
DoNotDelete wrote:I've thought about this and I wonder - is that really the comic's demographic?

Yes, and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot child.

Okay? Did it just get ugly?

Mordum wrote:
DoNotDelete wrote:Most people who played Mega Man as kids will be in their twenties-going-on-thirties now - the majority of the patrons at my comic book store are in that age bracket - not a lot of them buy Mega Man but a lot of them do buy the Sonic comics (the ratio in my store is two Mega Man comics to ten Sonic comics) the comic store owner has told me a number of times that kids (of the eight year old variety) only occasionally come in for 'Pogeyman Cards' - whatever they are. So I think that saying this comic is for 'eight year olds' is just an illusion/misconception.

A product is built for a specific demographic, regardless of the full spectrum of people that buy that product. If a lot of adults play with Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots, that doesn't mean Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots are made for adults. It just means adults play with Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots.

It doesn't matter if a bunch of adults are buying and reading Megaman. It matters who the comic is AIMED at: being an all ages comic, it's written to not be particularly insulting to any age group, but being a sentimental, emotional character drama full of bright fluffy robot Looney Tunes, it is structured, designed, and composed in a way where the base level entry point for any reader is made through the ease of entry for children. It is a comic for children. That doesn't mean it can't be smart, that doesn't mean adults can't like it. It just means it's for children.

This book is made for children, and "I buy it, I see other adults buying it, therefore children are not the demographic" is the logic, ironically, a child has. Which makes one fitting for the demographic of this comic. Some of us are capable of admitting we like things for eight year olds. I never have difficulty reconciling my love for Yu-Gi-Oh! while also admitting it's written for invalid babies. I'd like to think, as we're adults discussing fiction that (supposedly) should be written at a more adult level, you can show that same capacity and courtesy.

Okay, I'm not going to argue with that. At the same time though I'm forced to acknowledge the sad truth that children of the age group you're using as a case study (eight year olds) buy far, far less comics than people in the 20-to-30-year old bracket. I know this from real-world conversations with somebody who owns and runs a comic book store.

Is the Archie Mega Man comic targeted at eight year olds? Maybe. How many eight year olds actually buy it? That's probably a figure very close to zero. So are we arguing about a moot point? Most probably.

Mordum wrote:Like I can't tell if you're someone who reads actual science fiction literature dealing with the limits and nature of artificial intelligence who, for some inexplicable reason, is really bothered by the same lack of depth in a comic book adapting a game where you shoot cute mascots and are bothered that these comics are only addressing these concepts at an introductory level, which as you allude can't possibly be true because it's totally NOT intended for the age group that would need introductory fiction for these concepts. Like if someone who got super into Thomas Mallory, Beowulf, and Gilgamesh and got mad at He-Man and Thundercats for being too clean.

Alright. I'll concede that this comic is meant to be an 'introductory level' robot story - much as 'Astro Boy' is intended to be. I've somehow been sidelined into arguing for Mega Man to deal with 'more difficult robot issues' when that was never my intent in this thread. However...

Mordum wrote:OR if you're someone really interested in this subject matter, but can't seem to move yourself to where the actual literature is, instead wanting to get your high science fiction fix through facsimiles that're all pretty basic, surface level approaches to their subject matter (because, hey, Asimov, Dick, et al. didn't base their books on action figures, why bother with them?) and thus your idea of addressing high concepts intelligently really is based entirely on which comic manipulating your nostalgia can do it better, rather than which one actually truly explores the concepts presented.

I enjoy high-end robot stories, but I also enjoy illustrated materials such as graphic novels and comic books. That Hitoshi Ariga's Megamix and Gigamix mangas somehow delivered both Asimov-level stories regarding robot existentialism as well as entertaining comic-book visuals featuring Mega Man characters is not something to be snorted at. I would personally, most definitely, recommend Hitoshi Ariga's Mega Man efforts to both children and adults alike.

I'll concede that expecting the same level of sophistication of Archie's Mega Man is perhaps asking too much. However, it is not impossible and it is not unprecedented.

Mordum wrote:Also, while I acknowledge that you cover some of this in sections of your post, see my lack of responding to them as my lack of acknowledgement of their validity, as I trust your ability to reconcile game and narrative elements about as far as I can throw it and think your entire argument of insisting intelligence over a source material you also insist has to be heavily rewritten is obnoxious.

All the chaff aside - I'll argue only that there are components to the Mega Man X series that have a lot of promise from a storytelling perspective. I acknowledge those components and say only that they do more for me than anything in the Mega Man classic series does. If you don't agree with me then I'm okay with that.
User avatar
DoNotDelete
BumbleCitizen
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:17 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: What if Archie had started out with X instead of Mega Ma

Postby Mordum » Thu May 07, 2015 6:08 am

As I see it it's no more harmful to the English language than having 'flammable' and 'inflammable' explain the exact same material properties


Which I also hate.

I think - on the internet especially - people are too quick to look for a sensationalist racism angle based off the colour of a character's skin and overlook the simple truth that sometimes a black man is just a black man.


Except when his story is an EXPLICIT PARALLEL TO RACE RELATIONS LIKE IT IS IN COMMAND MISSION.

Otherwise we would agree, but no no. Don't even try to back out of that with pseudo-colorblindness. He's a rebel leader fighting for freedom who eventually goes on trial for his actions while also being the only major black character. Don't even give me that that pseudo-tolerance to cover up the unfortunate, rather racist implications of X's poor use of Reploid struggles and associating it with him. There's being tolerant and not wanting to define someone by race, and then there's being SO colorblind you have an inability to see when someone's struggles are being flat out insulted.

Sure, there are race-issue-oriented parallels to be found within the context of the Reploid world if you're looking for them really hard - but at the same time you're arguing this is a game for babies that pretends to have depth, you're also asking that we acknowledge deep ideological meanings.


Two things.

1. Doing an RPG style story focusing on Reploids and making them more explicitly an oppressed minority while making their leader a black man is only looking into it really hard if you happen to need glasses but are not wearing them at that moment. You're playing the EXACT opposite of colorblindness, where race becomes such a nonfactor that even insulting instances of its presence don't register. Which...isn't really much better than ignoring how race is treated. I'm no activist, not even particularly socially conscious, and am a politically incorrect @#$% first and foremost (I'm a gay man who uses our designated slur more than I breathe), but, like. It's right there.

It's seriously right there.

2. Basic, recognizable race parallels that're presented as maintext are not deep and recognizing a blatantly obvious race parallel as deep is not really a great idea.

Okay? Did it just get ugly?


Would've had no problem if you didn't go AYHUKKA HEARTY LAUGHTER MR. SILLY GRAMMARIAN while also arguing "This thing is inherently intelligent source material, but only if we rewrite literally everything about it" in the same breath.

I'm bothered by two things: intellectual dishonesty and obnoxious chumchum jokes when someone's just trying to talk to you like a human being. Guess what two things you did.

Is the Archie Mega Man comic targeted at eight year olds? Maybe. How many eight year olds actually buy it? That's probably a figure very close to zero. So are we arguing about a moot point? Most probably.


It's a moot point in the sense that it's a very relevant point and you thinking children not paying attention to something made for them means it must be made for adults because what's logic, and it's like asking My Little Pony to delve into deeper feminine psychology because it's loudest audience are men in their basement.

If you're really talking about discussing the merits of a piece of art, whether writing, illustration, performance, etc., everything you say is painted in a new light if you try really hard to find a way to discuss something beyond the context it's created for. It's one thing to interpret writer intent, writing process, and the woes of adaptation (even if I think your assessment of Flynn's relationship to the source material is incredibly baseless, THAT part of your discussion hasn't come off idiotic). It's another entirely to insist that, if a work written as an introduction to science fiction for younger children but is co-opted by adults, it should be judged on a level of how much it appeases adults with how it introduces science fiction. To put it frankly, that is incredibly stupid.

Let me illustrate a comparison, so you get where I'm coming from. Personally, I'm not a huge robot guy and am not the BIGGEST sci-fi guy ever, but I like it now and then. But part of why I like the Ian Flynn Archie comic is because I recognize a lot of the themes in it as overlapping with the basic DNA of my previously aforementioned favorite archetype, angels (the Book of Enoch was a HUGE, FORMATIVE text for me, among other works). I like that, like angels, the Robot Masters are created under the pretense of not having free will but still, paradoxically and like the sons of God, having personalities, thoughts, and feelings. That story has always appealed to me and combining that with one of my favorite emotional tones of lighthearted adventure and comedy shifting seamlessly into foreboding, existential angst, makes for a reading experience I enjoy and I am thankful that the book was written in a way that all ages can enjoy, rather than dumbing down its concepts to make them insulting for adults and damaging for children.

I also really loved Megaman NT Warrior growing up, and know certain aspects of the Battle Network backstory plus the anime exclusive notions of Duo and Slur as vengeful, angry God and angel respectively can all be gathered together to create something that thematically resembles my favorite science fiction series, Caprica. I ADORE Caprica for its really adept way it combines Glen Larson's Mormonism and its various esoterica with themes of feminist empowerment or humankind seeking its own godhood (which is a bit of a thumbs down on Larson's beliefs, if you think about it, associating all that Mormon mythology with personal downfall. Rude!). I love Caprica so much, and I'm sure NT Warrior/Battle Network possessing similarities is why I still have affection for it, but, here's the thing...

...I don't...WANT it to be Caprica. As much as I joke about it basically being Caprica For Babies, that's...what it is and I don't really care that it isn't more than that. I don't mind it vaguely, archetypally resembling Caprica but having its high concepts more diluted for more emotional character accessibility because I already have Caprica. I don't need Megaman or Megaman X to be Asimov when I could just go read Asimov. I like it for my own specific personal reasons nobody but me has to like it for, and on the plus side you might turn a bunch of kids onto thematically similar higher literature in a few years. Gravy.


I enjoy high-end robot stories,


That makes this worse.

I'll concede that expecting the same level of sophistication of Archie's Mega Man is perhaps asking too much. However, it is not impossible and it is not unprecedented.


My problem with all this is that, while Megaman X is rad as a game and the gameplay is fun as all get out, it's incredibly condescending to create this morally ambiguous robotic ethics story that's contradictory anyway on the edges of a game where your only goal is to kill other people and your incentive is to make yourself more of a weapon. It's like how Call of Duty has anti-war messages but everything is built into the multiplayer being the core experience.

Megaman X is just if Call of Duty wasn't a piece of trash.

So that's why I can't really grok this need you have to both insist Megaman X is the "morally ambiguous Megaman" (it's not) and the more high end, intellectually stimulating premise. It's not. You arguing this isn't far removed from me trying to argue Android of Notre Dame should be respected as a complex treatise on the morality of medicine and not just an incredibly basic arc with trappings of medical ethics as window dressing. I don't think, even for a second, that a writer should be obligated to stay completely true and respectful to X's supposed moral ambiguity when the game doesn't even bother for any given moment.

That being said, I will take back the insults. That went too far and I'm not exactly mad about what I was mad about anymore. I sincerely apologize. Honestly? I appreciate that, even if I really disagree with you, you're not only standing ground with what you think but you're not particularly phased by me being an aggressive jerk, as I am wont to be. I admire that in someone, so as far as I'm concerned, you're a cool dude.

But Megaman X isn't smart. It's not even "potentially" smart...not moreso than anything else, anyway, and nothing particularly inherent to its composition means someone has or has to make it as complex as Isaac Asimov. I wouldn't mind either way if someone did, but saying X is more suited to it is a big fallacy. If anything, X is entirely about undermining every single theme it tells you it has and I think, rather than insisting X be made so someone can make it what it pretends to be, someone should just be allowed to approach it however they want and not really care about the ethics of robotics (unless they want). The closest I was ever interested in X's story at any point was during the X Factor arc, and that was entirely because I liked it as the backdrop for Megaman and Xander paralleled as pioneers for a greater world, not because of any particular rowbit stuff.
User avatar
Mordum
BumbleNoble
 
Posts: 1072
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:58 am

Re: What if Archie had started out with X instead of Mega Ma

Postby DoNotDelete » Wed May 13, 2015 10:36 am

Mordum wrote:
DoNotDelete wrote:I think - on the internet especially - people are too quick to look for a sensationalist racism angle based off the colour of a character's skin and overlook the simple truth that sometimes a black man is just a black man.

Except when his story is an EXPLICIT PARALLEL TO RACE RELATIONS LIKE IT IS IN COMMAND MISSION.

Otherwise we would agree, but no no. Don't even try to back out of that with pseudo-colorblindness. He's a rebel leader fighting for freedom who eventually goes on trial for his actions while also being the only major black character. Don't even give me that that pseudo-tolerance to cover up the unfortunate, rather racist implications of X's poor use of Reploid struggles and associating it with him. There's being tolerant and not wanting to define someone by race, and then there's being SO colorblind you have an inability to see when someone's struggles are being flat out insulted.

Please don't jump on me again for being 'colourblind' or whatever, but... I honestly don't think that the whole race oppression thing was intentional on the game designer's/writers' part. Coming at it from the perspective of a character designer I expect that Epsilon only ended up being a black man because it was the easiest way of visibly dissociating him from Sigma. The two of them are basically the same person just with different skin pigmentation - they have the same build and height (for the most part) and with Sigma having gone through many different armours/designs already, Epsilon honestly may just as well have ended up being another return of Sigma.

I'm not defending this design decision - it's honestly pretty lazy on the designer's part in that they could have pushed Epsilon into being something very far removed from Sigma - but no - they chose the easy route and simply gave a pseudo-Sigma a skin colour respray, so to speak.

So even though Epsilon's story can be seen as a race-issue-oriented parallel I'd still argue that it's most likely just an unfortunate accident and not intentional.

Again, you can disagree with me if you want. I'm personally very tired of seeing people immediately jump on the 'racist accusation' bandwagon instead of taking a step back to analyse the situation from a different perspective and/or giving the originators of the offending piece benefit-of-the-doubt.

Mordum wrote:
DoNotDelete wrote:Okay? Did it just get ugly?

Would've had no problem if you didn't go AYHUKKA HEARTY LAUGHTER MR. SILLY GRAMMARIAN while also arguing "This thing is inherently intelligent source material, but only if we rewrite literally everything about it" in the same breath.

I'm bothered by two things: intellectual dishonesty and obnoxious chumchum jokes when someone's just trying to talk to you like a human being. Guess what two things you did.

Okay, I'm bothered by a number of things too - one of them is people picking out and focusing on individual words from something I've written instead of just allowing the conversation to move on as it should. You're apparently into proper grammar/spelling/word usage in a big way - that's fine, I'm also well-worded but I'm prepared to let a lot of things pass under my radar because - after all - this is the internet and there are so many people with so many different levels of ability.

Also you only ever look like a self-satisfied intellectual dick for pointing out spelling/grammar errors in other people's posts/comments when they're trying their darnedest to articulate their thoughts. It doesn't matter if you're talking to a (supposed) intellectual or to someone whose first language isn't even English, you only ever look like a dick.*

*Please excuse the expletives.

I tried to make light of the situation by laughing it off (and/or going all 'chumchum') and you unfortunately took it all the wrong way... or at least saw it as an opportunity to open up a can of inexcusably rude intellectual whoopass on me (though you've since apologised).

About the rewriting things: I've said on a number of occasions that Ian sticks too closely to the formulas set out by the Mega Man games, I've also said that the storyline/formula set out by an 80's videogame does not necessarily make a good cut-and-graft storyline for a comic book. That applies to the X games too - and even though an RPG game like Command Mission has a storyline already well laid out, I'd argue that it too would need to be 'changed up' and reorganised a little bit before being adapted.

I'll admit I've overstated the strength and depth of X's storylines (I can be guilty of overstating when I'm making an impassioned case for something) but I won't take back what I've implied about needing to reorganise the story/game formula components into something more suitable for storytelling/comic book illustration - that's just a given.

Mordum wrote:Let me illustrate a comparison, so you get where I'm coming from. Personally, I'm not a huge robot guy and am not the BIGGEST sci-fi guy ever, but I like it now and then. But part of why I like the Ian Flynn Archie comic is because I recognize a lot of the themes in it as overlapping with the basic DNA of my previously aforementioned favorite archetype, angels (the Book of Enoch was a HUGE, FORMATIVE text for me, among other works). I like that, like angels, the Robot Masters are created under the pretense of not having free will but still, paradoxically and like the sons of God, having personalities, thoughts, and feelings. That story has always appealed to me and combining that with one of my favorite emotional tones of lighthearted adventure and comedy shifting seamlessly into foreboding, existential angst, makes for a reading experience I enjoy and I am thankful that the book was written in a way that all ages can enjoy, rather than dumbing down its concepts to make them insulting for adults and damaging for children.

If we're breaking aside for a moment - I myself have never really been interested in stories about human beings. I've always been more drawn to stories that deal with outsiders - be they mutants, aliens, robots or 'other beings' - having to fit in/adapt to (often hostile) human social environments. I personally have always struggled to identify myself as 'completely human' - much less so fit into human society - so I identify more with these 'non-human' characters (like robots - but not exclusively) than I do with anything solely human-oriented that's thrust under my nose. I realise that these kinds of stories are often just analogues for human issues, but the fact the protagonists aren't human actually makes the stories more relateable for me.

Mordum wrote:I don't need Megaman or Megaman X to be Asimov when I could just go read Asimov. I like it for my own specific personal reasons nobody but me has to like it for, and on the plus side you might turn a bunch of kids onto thematically similar higher literature in a few years. Gravy.

I'm honestly coming around to this kind of thinking now. I think Hitoshi Ariga's Mega Man efforts spoiled me/gave me unrealistic expectations of how Mega Man should be handled. It's unfair of me to expect everyone to handle writing/illustrating Mega Man stories the same way (though it still gives me cause for disappointment when reading the Archie Mega Man stories).

Mordum wrote:So that's why I can't really grok this need you have to both insist Megaman X is the "morally ambiguous Megaman" (it's not) and the more high end, intellectually stimulating premise. It's not. You arguing this isn't far removed from me trying to argue Android of Notre Dame should be respected as a complex treatise on the morality of medicine and not just an incredibly basic arc with trappings of medical ethics as window dressing. I don't think, even for a second, that a writer should be obligated to stay completely true and respectful to X's supposed moral ambiguity when the game doesn't even bother for any given moment.

I don't actually recall making those first two arguments to the point of insistence - if I gave that impression please excuse me for overstating. I do personally find X more interesting than Mega Man because he doesn't have the family element to fall back on. X kinda has a 'brother' in the form of Zero, but Zero's his own thing too.

Mordum wrote:That being said, I will take back the insults. That went too far and I'm not exactly mad about what I was mad about anymore. I sincerely apologize. Honestly? I appreciate that, even if I really disagree with you, you're not only standing ground with what you think but you're not particularly phased by me being an aggressive jerk, as I am wont to be. I admire that in someone, so as far as I'm concerned, you're a cool dude.

I don't think disagreeing with someone ever excuses you of the obligation to be polite, but I appreciate you apologising for the insults.
User avatar
DoNotDelete
BumbleCitizen
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 2:17 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: What if Archie had started out with X instead of Mega Ma

Postby Mordum » Wed May 13, 2015 2:39 pm

DoNotDelete wrote:Please don't jump on me again for being 'colourblind' or whatever, but... I honestly don't think that the whole race oppression thing was intentional on the game designer's/writers' part. Coming at it from the perspective of a character designer I expect that Epsilon only ended up being a black man because it was the easiest way of visibly dissociating him from Sigma. The two of them are basically the same person just with different skin pigmentation - they have the same build and height (for the most part) and with Sigma having gone through many different armours/designs already, Epsilon honestly may just as well have ended up being another return of Sigma.

I'm not defending this design decision - it's honestly pretty lazy on the designer's part in that they could have pushed Epsilon into being something very far removed from Sigma - but no - they chose the easy route and simply gave a pseudo-Sigma a skin colour respray, so to speak.

So even though Epsilon's story can be seen as a race-issue-oriented parallel I'd still argue that it's most likely just an unfortunate accident and not intentional.


I can buy it as being an accident. And I can grok being tired of that type of controversy.

That just makes it a stupid, condescending accident. If you make a game series about destroying a specific group of people for eight games and rewarding you with the satisfaction of being an efficient killer, maybe you shouldn't make a sympathetic leader of theirs a black guy.

I'm just saying. There's valid criticism there. I think someone would be allowed to call that racist.

Or at least pretentious. Megaman X is pretty laughably pretentious.

I tried to make light of the situation by laughing it off (and/or going all 'chumchum') and you unfortunately took it all the wrong way... or at least saw it as an opportunity to open up a can of inexcusably rude intellectual whoopass on me (though you've since apologised).


If you just said "I don't care", it would've been way more respectable from my end than what you did. But I mean, I make no excuses for how I am. I'm a giant @#$%. But I also know someone worth respecting when I see it and don't mind apologizing. I actually do anticipate more conversations between us in the future, and I'm gonna strive to be more polite about it.

About the rewriting things: I've said on a number of occasions that Ian sticks too closely to the formulas set out by the Mega Man games, I've also said that the storyline/formula set out by an 80's videogame does not necessarily make a good cut-and-graft storyline for a comic book. That applies to the X games too - and even though an RPG game like Command Mission has a storyline already well laid out, I'd argue that it too would need to be 'changed up' and reorganised a little bit before being adapted.

I'll admit I've overstated the strength and depth of X's storylines (I can be guilty of overstating when I'm making an impassioned case for something) but I won't take back what I've implied about needing to reorganise the story/game formula components into something more suitable for storytelling/comic book illustration - that's just a given.


I agree with you, I just don't think Megaman X is somehow more intelligent source material. That's my thing, because so much of it is a giant vat of pretentious, superfluous stupid.

If we're breaking aside for a moment - I myself have never really been interested in stories about human beings. I've always been more drawn to stories that deal with outsiders - be they mutants, aliens, robots or 'other beings' - having to fit in/adapt to (often hostile) human social environments. I personally have always struggled to identify myself as 'completely human' - much less so fit into human society - so I identify more with these 'non-human' characters (like robots - but not exclusively) than I do with anything solely human-oriented that's thrust under my nose. I realise that these kinds of stories are often just analogues for human issues, but the fact the protagonists aren't human actually makes the stories more relateable for me.


Which is chill, and is interesting to discuss. The insight into your perspective intrigues me.
User avatar
Mordum
BumbleNoble
 
Posts: 1072
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:58 am

Previous

Return to For Everlasting Peace!



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest