Former NGPD

Former Review Request Club Member

Former General Forum Moderator

Known by Phobotech back before I got my name changed.

Presently full-time Animator, Part-time Professional Voice Actor, Daily Scourer of the Under Judgments.

Lookin' to get more Gold on my profile. Reporting for Duty!

The Mighty Orbots had such a bangin' soundtrack, and I can't find a clean cut version of just the original music. It's extremely hard to find.

It even made the front page!

No. I found out a couple of months ago that my wife was pregnant with our first child, and on the 7th of this month she miscarried. We've been in a daze. The whiplash of preparing to meet someone, and suddenly halting those preparations. Grieving. I'm lurking on the forums to distract myself.

I should create. I've been depressed. I need to open something up and just do something.

It is truly "a body at rest stays at rest, a body in motion stays in motion" circumstance.

I'm not moving enough.

I've been trying to cultivate the discipline to go, to self-start, to go and do the things even when I don't feel like doing them.

It's hard. I feel heavy. I need to start. I just need to finish something. Anything. Something stupid. Something funny. Something representing how I feel.

And when I freeze I seem to only focus on the stillness and the silence.

Make it a fullshot.

I get it, you want the focus to be on the meat of the action. You want to focus on the intimacy of the scene, so you had to get that hand on the ass. Legs add to body language. So can the feet, clothed or not.

I'm mainly saying make it a fullshot because you chopped off the top of her hair at the top of the frame. That's a bad composition habit, and it's fine for comic book panels, but less so for standalone art pieces. Let the subjects and it's environment be free to breathe, free for your audience to soak up more details.

And I know feet are hard to draw, clothed or not, because I'm guilty of hiding them out of frame too. It's one of the last things I draw, and by that point with time and energy spent, I don't want to fuck with them. So they get chopped off or phoned in and- wouldn't you know it- I don't gain any experience drawing that anatomy, and they stay a weakpoint. For your own sake, as an artist, don't rob yourself of the opportunity to practice at and strengthen anatomical weakpoints.

Make it a fullshot.

Confront decisions you've made where you chose to depict your characters posed a certain way, obstructed a certain way, or even designes (clothed) a certain way to conceal your anatomical weakpoints.

Confront them. Research these things, and dedicate whole pages into private sketchbooks that are just working on those weakpoints.

That way you can address your next pieces stronger.

Some kinda mindfuck MC Escher trippy thing that's multiple things in one.

I'm pan, but go off, queen.

Interesting strategy: Deflect, and use your age and gender as an excuse instead of participating in the discussion that you started.

I like to think that any talking down that I did was deserved on the merits of your topic and ideas. I do my best not to bring gender or age into it.

Interesting that you did, though.

That may need to be added to the list of Gender Nonconformity: Do's and Dont's!

I take it back; what a topical way to end the thread.

EDIT: Wooo 15K posts! I regret nothing!

How underwhelming.

You don't have the conviction to mean what you say, and you don't have the courage to confront your point from another perspective.

It's no skin off my bones; you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. But "be careful what you get good at, because you'll be doing a lot of it" can also apply to your negative traits.

You won't get better at communicating your thoughts and perspectives if you don't practice them.

With no further reference to the black hole among us, which it's clear in hindsight that's what all of this was about...an interesting and ever-evolving discussion that contains quite a bit of nuance and perspectives has been cheapened to an inter-personal drama piece that can be boiled down to "Isn't it FUNNY when SOME PEOPLE decide to do this with their art, how weird amiright? I don't do witch hunts, but girl, broom broom"

Yet, here we are. At the finale of the thread, and it all culminated into "Thread's dead, go away"

Before the lock: Here's my final take on Gender Nonconformity: Depiction Do's and Dont's for the record, then. For those that spelunk into locked threads years from now.

Live and let live.

It costs zero dollars to mind your own business, and with a commodity so cheap, don't bargain your time into pettiness.

If someone draws something that pisses you off, draw something better. Let spite be the fuel in your engine.

-Because-

Critique never comes from somebody doing more than you. It always comes from somebody doing less.

This, specifically so that you don't get that dopamine reward chemical too early, to the point that you don't finish it.

I was producing a webcomic here for the BBS thread, and at it's peak, it looked like this.

But THEN I got too far into my head, and I was showing off previews.

I was seeking praise. I received that praise, so my brain got it's reward chemical, and I lost motivation to keep working on it. I was burned out, a lot of shit was happening at once in real life, I missed my own self-imposed deadline and the next page stopped after I got the ink done. I couldn't even bring myself to color it in.

Burn your early drafts. Keep your cards close to your chest. And deprive yourself of the validation you seek until AFTER it's done.

I kept fucking myself over by leaking future roughs.

And then I fucked myself over by trying to finish inkwork on later pages, without first finishing and publishing the coloring on the previous two! In short, I was on the fast-track of not giving a fuck about this project anymore. And this page is the furthest it ever got.

You can see me lose motivation in mid-process.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Everything you do in your comic, whether you finish it or not, whether less than 10 people see it or more than a thousand people see it, it doesn't matter. You're gonna make mistakes. It's not going to be perfect, so just focus on getting it done. The stumbles and miscalculations you make on the way are going to make you wiser about the process. You will learn what you don't know by running into it first-hand. And this will inform the questions you need to be asking later.

Experience is going to be your greatest teacher. So just do it, regardless of anyone's critique, regardless of any feedback whatsoever, positive or negative...DOING IT will advance your skills.

That's worth exploring. Succeed or fail or stop because life happens or whatever reason you choose. All of it will be cumulative experience. You get out of it what you put into it.

For more about Dopamine, read this book. Learn how your brain functions so that you can build a workflow that gets you the results you're looking for.

Frank Frazetta. I gotta work on my anatomy and paints.

Hey OP, don't leave us hanging. Make a further point to elaborate where you're coming from, and clarify why you gave my last response to you an Angry Face. That post was too long, I can't tell what part about it made you mad or why.

Besides, I figured out who you made this thread about days ago. You have an opportunity to refine your point without drama, but rather an intellectual discussion exploring and articulating what it is you're initially trying to say.

I'm here for that kinda discussion (as demonstrated above), I got my professor sweater vest on and warmed up, I'm here to throw down on some creative education. I don't care about chisme.

When you have time, of course.

Are you using Google Translate to help you write these posts, because English isn't your first language, or did you and the schools fail each other? Because a lot of parts of these posts don't make sense.

"I wonder whenever" means you are wondering when something happened...like, the time and date something occurred.

But that's followed by "the anthropomorphic peacock in a dress", which is a person or, if referencing artwork, an object.

which is then seamlessly followed by "if the artist even knows."

Which makes me think that you meant to say:

"I wonder if the artist even knows who made the anthropomorphic peacock in a dress."

Which still doesn't make sense. I went back to the first page of this thread to see if I missed something, and you're the only one talking about a peacock, repeatedly.

It just comes off as nonsense.

...Are you sure you're in the right thread, buddy? Are you okay? Are you having a stroke?

Well, have the courage to say what you mean about the thing you're trying to talk about.

You used RCDart as an example, I discussed the example. Your response was "That wasn't even what I meant"

Well, nut up / pussy up, let's get to it. I wrangled Emily-Youcis into this discussion and she has nothing to do with the topic.

Shall I just keep wrangling artists in until I accidentally trip over what this entire thread was about? Have conviction ffs.

"I gave them incomplete information, and the thread did exactly what I thought it was going to do, ho hum, no progress is made towards this discussion."

That sounds like a personal problem, not a fault of the community of artists in this thread as a whole.

By the time I got to Powder I had like 200 or less characters left to write my point, so I was hastily wrapping it up, but I agree with your observations. I actually completely forgot about that creepy scene with Jeff Goldblum alone in the cafeteria. But those overtones are clear as day to see. Those decisions being made for that film had reasons, and whether or not it was meant to be a piece about homosexuality in a bigoted rural community (Texas, in this example), it's art that's depicting a vision.

In an era of film that was filled with "strange man/boy has extraordinary powers and heals a community / does a thing at the amazement of people who doubted him."

Like 1996 Phenomenon. John Travolta sees a UFO or something and has fantastical powers, commits the ultimate sacrifice to save others.

Like 1997 Still Breathing. Brendan Fraser has a premonition about a woman and alters her destiny in the name of love.

And I'm sure there's other examples, but my point is, Hollywood was locked in on a trend in the mid-90's that Powder kinda fell into.

And it's only with hindsight with Salva's accusations and criminal history that it clarifies a lot of his artistic vision, and his intent is detectable in the decisions of some of these shots.

The albino boy is introduced hiding away in a basement.

He's confronted alone in the woods by an armed gang of bullies that call him the F slur.

He's judged for his personal appearance, and is the talk of the town in gossip circles because of his differences.

The gangup where they strip him and shove in a mud puddle is likely an allegory for rape or sexual assault, yes.

He concludes his story and the conflict of the town by...uh...disintegrating himself and becoming one with the clouds.

and we all know that clouds make rain and on a sunny day, that's rainbows so...infallible argument that the entire thing was about homosexuality- HAH, I WIN. lol

And yeah, I agree with your point about drag. It's an important facet of art, and it takes a lot of skill and practice to pull off. Too Wong Foo and Hedwig and the Angry Inch are some of my favorites on the subject.

And when you watch these movies, you can tell where they're coming from. It doesn't trip the uncanny valley of insincerity, it is and always has been "Real Recognizes Real."

That's why Powder's creepy and objectively a mediocre movie.

That's why Rocky Horror Picture Show is still revered as an objectively fun movie.

That's why it doesn't take us out of it when Iggy Pop is naked in a washbucket taking a bath in the middle of Cry Baby.

Yeah John Waters is gay. Yeah Iggy Pop is an unabashed weirdo and he loves it. It's a fun and competent movie, and this scene is just establishing what's considered a normal state for this family. It's good art!

Yeah it seems like OP just had gripes based on what they've seen out in the wild.

And whatever that artist made could've had a couple of compelling reasons for it. It doesn't matter what the scenario is.

• If it was commissioned by somebody that wanted to see art that resembled those proportions and design elements.
• If it was a personal piece because THEY wanted to see a character that hit the notes they were going for intentionally.
• If it was parody that was commentary on trends by exaggerating certain design elements, calling attention to absurd design elements or calling attention to tropes found in certain communities or art groups.

That's their prerogative as an artist, as an online art creator, as a creative.

And if it was anything that left enough of an impression for you to be thinking about it a day later, or a week later, or months or years later...

As art, it succeeded.

If you wanna get dictionary specific, all art is "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination...to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

By that logic, famous white supremacist Emily Youcis, aka Pistachio Girl, aka Creator of Alfred Alfer is an artist.

Because even if she has her well-animated cartoon dog crucified or dancing on the grave or doing other extremely gross or heinous acts, it is creative expression that made you feel a certain way. And even if it's divisive, it's succeeding at what it set out to do, and we shouldn't criticize the artwork on those merits. Even if the creator is flawed.

Like, let's dial it back to OP's original point. The post that they were supposedly too scared to bring up at first based on backlash.

Is this art that I would particularly seek out? No, but who am I to decry the validity of it's creative direction.

If ladies have endured a time-honored tradition of being depicted with unrealistic body-standards, then why not males, and presented with a design philosophy that caters toward male consumption? A waist you could strangle with two hands? A lot to grab above and below? I wonder if this was made before Endgame's "That is America's ass" design trope. It's taking this hyper-masculine, macho character and flipping it around so they're submissive and breedable.

Even if I'm not the demographic or psychographic for it, I'm not blind to the fact that there's a market for this. And it was drawn with craftsmanship. OP's critique seems to be

That point dances around what they truly mean.

"There is a difference between design alone and the treatment / intent of the design decisions."

and that "Design indicates intention."

And I'm here to point out:

"Yeah, no duh. I thought that was always understood."

And for a negative example they brought up an anime, which, the Japanese don't give af about non-Japanese people's feelings. They still depict black characters with mammy lips. You honestly expect the anime industry to handle LGBTQ+ character designs with subtlety and respect? It's all contextual. It has always had to do with what they're trying to do in the story.

Are we trying to give the audience brevity and lighten the mood with humor?

Tenga Toppa Gurren Lagann is giving you a nelly sex pest that is 80% there to be a comedic foil by harassing straight characters, weirding them out for laughs.

Hell, even when they do it well, they whiplash in the opposite direction. Sometimes it's creative subversion.

In 2001, Cowboy Bebop had Faye Valentine go out to retrieve a bounty and she was looking for a woman. Turns out she changed sex to conceal her identity, and revealed herself as a trans woman in a scene that looked like this.

There was no indication in her vocal performance, it wasn't played for laughs. It shocked Faye and she didn't know how to process it at first, but that's because it was a surprise. A subversion that assisted with the storytelling premise about identity, sexuality, and....in the same show Spike runs into a character that looks like this and it was played for laughs.

All of these different design elements are different tools in the toolshed. There's a time and place for any tool.

Not everything has to be dead on accurate. Not everything is designed to be respectful either. Nor is everything designed to be taken seriously.

(Just as it is in reality. Art imitates life, life imitates art, and sometimes that art is replicating unserious moments. Just as likely are unserious people going to replicate serious and unserious art alike!)

The people that you're thinking critically about for the art that they made probably did so for a very good reason.

My last two examples of this.

Ridley Scott was filming Alien. You get someone like H.R. Giger involved, there's going to be a lot of sexual undertones and overtones in it, but it's going to be packaged allegorically. With pregnancy, with sexual violence, with fear in general.

After Ripley escapes the Nostromo with her cat, she is relaxed and in her underwear. Pics or it never happened.

Put your goddamn cocks away, I'm not finished.

Now, initially, Ridley Scott wanted her to be completely nude for this scene. In this context, it makes sense- she (or so she thought) was the only survivor of her crew. She is alone, she just went through a traumatic experience, and she's setting off on the long journey to safety in the wake of this whole mess. 20th Century Fox, however, didn't want to get an NC-17 Rating, on account of all the other grisly things that happened with the Alien killing everybody, so they compromised for undergarments.

Here's the thing, whether or not her character was designed with few clothes or no clothes at all, it conveys a key point. She is vulnerable and in danger when it reveals that the Alien is alive and in the cabin with her. She's in danger, and this scene isn't played to tantalized, it's fucking tense. She's quietly, slowly getting into a space suit here to eject the alien and save her ass. That character design had a point! That's good art!

On the other end of the aisle, there's Victor Salva. You'd know him as the director of Jeepers Creepers, but he is a massive pervert and was convicted of molesting a 12 year old actor on the set of his film Clownhouse.

How could we have known that he was a creep?

Well, in a movie like 1995's Powder, he felt the need for a scene where this mutant albino kid was staring at a shirtless boy toweling himself off in the gymnasium bathroom. This incites violence in a local group of bullies who always had it out for him.

Now, this is in the third act of the movie. By this point, they've already seen this kid exhibit magnet powers, lightning powers, transferring agony from a dying deer to an adult powers, glass exploding powers, and probably more. They were calling him the F slur the entire time because they're homophobes and they don't like guys that are different.

What do they do to punish him? To put this "freak" in his place once and for all?

Victor Salva says "Strip him completely naked and look at his dick. For the plot."

This causes him to explode and summon a storm(?) One of the bullies dies from this but Powder saves him because he's a hero.

It's still art, but it's clear why this happened. The artist had a vision for nudity regardless of the plot, and its clearly shoehorned in.

Character design details should lend to the story-telling and world-building as a whole. It compliments instead of distracts from the story that you're trying to tell.

A good example is Obi Wan Kenobi is introduced wearing natural earth-toned robes because he's been living on a desert planet with two suns for decades. In fact the local population, the alien Jawas and Tusken Raiders, dress similarly because they too live on a desert planet with twin suns. You can tell that he's old because of the way he looks. You can tell he's a Jedi because he's wise and stoic like a samurai.

A bad example is people deciding that's the Jedi uniform, even on a bustling polluted city-planet devoid of trees or sand where the Jedi Temple was located, circa the Clone Wars. They could've worn anything, and I applaud Genndy Tartakovski for at least attempting to incorporate Clone Trooper armor in with the robes, but by every Jedi dressing like Obi Wan did, it makes Kenobi look silly because he was supposedly on Tattooine because he was hiding from the Empire trying to exterminate all Jedis.

If you wanted to depict your character having the case of the gays or the not-gays, you must first ask yourself if it's an important element to your plot. An element of pathos that gets your character into conflict.

We know that Anakin has a case of the Not-Gays because Luke and Leia still need to be born in order for Episode IV to happen. Kenobi could've had the pan, bi's, or gays, but he's given a heteronormative opposite so he can pull off irrational decisions or conflict with his celibate jedi code weirdness when his Mandogirlfriend gets in trouble to stir things up in the Clone Wars. Still, even if he had a boyfriend, he should exist because he's a part of a grander story, and not exist just to placate and check off a mark. Existing for the sake of existing.

Like Star Wars Squadrons had this badass TIE Fighter Pilot named Varko Gray. You'd know him from seeing this:

His sexuality wasn't a distracting element. His character design falls in line with uniform guidelines, because he's a TIE Fighter pilot for the Empire, and wearing something that screamed HAYYY QUEEN would pull focus from the story. He's the only one wearing a tightly tucked piece of cloth, perhaps a hankerchief, or scarf, around his neck. When you talk to him between combat missions, only then does he mention that he has a husband on Coruscant. That's world building to let you know that:

• The Galactic Empire is a fascist regime that's okay with homosexual relationships
• That piece of blue cloth is probably sentimental, and references his love to his partner.
• He's married, so he's not trouncing around looking for ass on the Star Destroyer
• Gays are represented in this world as competent and experienced pilots. Or at least, one of them is.

What you don't want is for your representation to pull focus. You want it to fit into this world because it makes sense. For them, for the overarching conflict of the story, as a storytelling element as it fits with the general point of the entire thing you're trying to tell.

Steven Universe's numerous queer representation makes sense because all of it fits with the overarching plot elements, of "others" being ostracized for not falling in line, for marginalized peoples facing oppression, for being unapologetically their own "others" WITH each other. And each character design element to depict what kind a unique individual they are fits with the world, the story, and helps drive the plot without pulling focus.

At no point did Steven fuse with Connie and felt compelled to stuff their loaded baked potato in center stage, nor did they need to spell it out for the audience that they are both / neither genders now, because the audience gets it. There's no need to underestimate your audience by spelling it out.

FUSION IS AN ALLEGORY FOR SEX AND COMPATABILITY WITH RELATIONSHIPS.

LAPIS LAZULI'S CAPTIVITY BY JASPER AND FORCED FUSION IS AN ALLEGORY FOR RAPE.

We get it because our eyes can see and our brains can brain.

When you have to explicitly spell it out, you're underestimating your audience.

Best example in recent memory is Nick Offerman's character in The Last Of Us.

We understand how he's survived this long in the apocalypse. We understand over the years he's prepped and fortified and worked to keep himself safe how that isolation was making him go insane. We see his compassion for another human being slowly and organically turn to affection, and he's scared because he's uncertain. Because trust doesn't come easily. But slowly, he lets his guard down, he gives himself permission to love.

And it isn't ideal- they still argue. Nobody said it was going to be perfect, but ultimately they're all they've got for each other. They do sweet things for one another because their compassion for one another blossoms into true love. Planting strawberries as a gift. And wandering into a hail of gunfire with careless abandon because they're willing to do illogical, unsafe acts, defending each other from violent invaders by unleashing incredible violence themselves because THAT'S what love is all about. And that ending was filled with human pathos and love and the whole thing was beautifully written.

....and not once did he need to wear a fishnet shirt for the audience to know that he's gay.

Not once did he need to do a Marvel Superheroine effeminate pose so the audience can go "Ohhhhh that's why they're kissing, oh."

Because you didn't need it.

• Princess Leia wore a slave outfit because she was a captive, objectified for her sex appeal. It shows the audience that she's a vulnerable damsel, and gives men (and some ladies) something to oggle at while cheering for her rescue.
• Conan the Barbarian wears next to nothing because he's almost more Caveman than Man, and his raw strength is the only visual indicator you need in order to tell what he's here to do. That macho musculature is the only dick he's bringing to the dick measuring context because his hands are occupied with a big metal weapon that he's about to coat in blood.

If you wanted to be inventive, you flip that heteronormative design principle on its head.

• Now, let's fart around with an example here, Red Sonja isn't wearing a scale-mail bikini because of sex appeal, but because she's actually ripped and she doesn't give af.
• Now He Man isn't wearing a...belt harness? On his chest because it gives him powers or whatever, but because Prince Adam willingly enslaves himself, sacrificing personal freedoms for fabulous powers and raw strengths. An inhibitor that keeps the Prince in line, tethered to the leylines of Castle Greyskull...I am literally making shit up on the fly as I type this.

My point is, don't do it for the sake of visibility. Do it because it fits with the story. Do it because it, in itself, is a storytelling element that teaches the audience visual information about your character besides "I guess they gay." Do more. Plant seeds that are foreshadowed elements to be explored later.

When designing your extra extra LGBTQ+ characters, refer to

Occam's Razor

Chekov's Gun.

If the design element doesn't tie-into foreshadowing or world-building elements, and it doesn't match the setting you've placed your characters in, then it's your responsibility to think analytically and critically about those decisions and say aloud "What the fuck is the point making them look like this?"

If it's "I like thick bear daddies and I wanna oggle their bear buns" that's fair. Make it fit with the story and world.

If it's "I like legs, and I want to look at nice legs", that's fine, but make that character design decision make sense.

I can't offend them if I don't depict them incorrectly, so to play it safe, I won't depict them. Because, you write what you know. Therefore, I won't pretend to know, so my characters will be written accurately because they'll be depicted how they're meant to be depicted.

@zattdott I loved this pilot!

If you ever need a voice, I'd do it for a credit where my name's spelled right. Let's talk!

I appreciate the shoutout. I saw two out of the three of the other daily tops, and they were well placed! Voted highly on each of them. We need more original content, and they're going in the right direction. May their accolades propel them into greater heights!

I wish he'd play Russian Roulette.

@CompunctionTime how do you balance your military career with your creative goals?

What would be the greatest achievement you're striving for in animation?

And also, have you watched Xavier Renegade Angel yet? Adult Swim started uploading whole episodes to their YouTube.

I had a falling out with my roommate, and I got evicted from my apartment. So I moved into a single bedroom by myself, and I was extremely alone.

Tried playing Red Dead Redemption, and that just made my depression worse.

Tried playing XCOM 2 again, and it wasn't doing it.

Found a little indie game that I thought looked really cool, Galak-Z.

It made me smile. This was at the height of my listening to synthwave and weed-smoking, and I had some good memories ordering Pizza, smoking a bowl, and feeling like an ace pilot in that thing. It really helped me bounce back from darkness.

Silver Surfer, obviously

But also, all of the original Mega Man titles.

Shocked that no one's mentioned NES Batman yet. Skip to that 1:26 and jam

That hub-world city that's shaped like a Poke-Ball pissed me off.

And I'd go around and talk to strangers just to learn more about the world, and damn near EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM gives you free shit. It took me out of it, bad.

Like, in Red/Blue, if a stranger gave you something, it was because you did something or it was a rare case of generosity. It was kind of a big deal, a "Wow, thanks for this, I really appreciate it!" moment. But when X did it, it felt like pandering.

"OHHHH HERE YOU GO, LITTLE BABYCHILD, YOU'RE THE CHOSEN ONE. PLEASE, TAKE THIS TOO! Y'know what, fuckit, HAVE MY CARR, YOU NEED IT MORE THAN MEEE"

"It's ME, Professor Oak! Fancy seeing you here! WHY DON'T YOU HAVE ANOTHER STARTER. OG KANTO PICKS, GO FOR IT. FREE OF CHARGE."

So, around middle-school / high-school, I was walking around Sears, and they had a demo PS2 set up in the electronics department.

This was around the time that I realized I was all about giant robots and mechs, so when I saw this, I had to check it out.

And lemme tell you, even though I was only playing about 5 to 10 minutes at a time, it seemed extremely mid back then. I couldn't get into it, but I would keep on coming back to it.

It became a highlight of my mall excursions around that time. "Hang on, I gotta duck into Sears real quick" and my friends would laugh like, "What, you need a lawnmower or something, wtf"

I had to get a second opinion. Third opinion. I kept trying to give it another chance, and yet, I was never hooked enough to rent it (either because I couldn't find it, or I'd rather rent something else) or just straight up buy it, with the no money I had as a kid.

I'd probably fuck with it on an emulator if I was bored, but even now I can think of 20 or 30 games I'd rather play if I had a PS2 emulator. And half of those involve mechs as well.

I was reminded of Commander Keen from Doom Eternal. It was actually one of the first PC games I ever played on my own computer as a kid. I had to look up game footage to remember how it actually played, and it's such a distant memory, I just kinda stared in disbelief. I remember being all about Commander Keen, but I think what I liked the most about it was he was just a colorful sprite version of Spaceman Spiff from Calvin & Hobbes, which I also loved at the time.

I was a Mercy main early on, back when it was just Overwatch. They nerfed her and added some Hamster in a mech-ball, and that was the straw that broke my back. I've never returned to it, and I never will.

Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and I'm moving on.

Patching the existing game into the sequel number was a mistake. Failing to deliver on its promises was an even bigger one, and all of this with the backdrop of how awful Blizzard has been to its creative staff. It's a cavalcade of disaster.

Even in my attempts to complete the games I already bought, I have no desire to scrape up my missing achievements for this game.

Almost a decade ago my buddy bought me Minecraft for the PS4 and I punched a tree, built a dirt hut, got killed by creepers and creatures over and over again, and stopped playing.

A few weeks ago, I reinstalled it. I'm achievement hunting at the moment. I just gotta cure a Zombie Villager, throw diamonds at a player, kill a Ghast with its own fireball, get a flame rod from some flame creature, deal 9 points of damage in a single hit, swim in lava with a fire resistance potion in effect, find an End Portal, and kill the dragon.

Then I'll probably uninstall it and never return to it again. It lulls me to sleep sometimes.