@Xansies and everything you just named such as marketing, and branding are all capitalist constructs, and concepts - NOT artistic ones.
This whole idea that financial motive is also tied deeply into art is false. It is only that way because people who are bad at art but good at capitalism have designed the system that way.
Art is art. It isn't tied to anything. We've been making art long before money as a concept even existed. When people would make art on cave walls with homemade paint and hues.
Art is as much a base part of humanity as language. We developed it as a sociological response to our evolution. We express ourselves through it. We express emotions through it. Something unique to humanity.
Meanwhile money, and capitalism are purely an idealistic and societal construct designed around how we engage with eachother (mostly in an effort to exert societal control)
Saying "you have to buy materials" isn't some fullstop proof that money is inherently tied to art.
The most powerful thing in human society IS art, and those with power (aka money) often abuse it to exert control and influence over it.
The entire argument of "art is both a product and art" is a flawed statement, because it's only product due to the system it exists within. From a larger anthropoligical point of view art is actually a "product of human creativity" and before you jump into a semantic minefield here --- product is also not inherently tied to capitalism. Human waste can also be defined as a product... My dandruff can be defined as a product, but it is not a capitalist product.
Production is simply the act of generation/transformation of materials into another form. It is a verb. To produce means to produce. It does not mean that it has a financial (which is capitalist term) value tied to it.
Humans use to art to express emotions, thoughts and feelings. To try and define art as a capitalist product kills the purpose of art, and what it truly is. That said real art will always exist despite these people. Always has, always will. Miyamoto is simply a cold-capitalist man - easy as that.
The current Nintendo resembles the Nintendo before Iwata had become CEO.
People who don't know, Nintendo used to be quite rutheless in how they tackled business. This isn't news. Miyamoto used to go to Cabaret Clubs with his bosses and, even before his time the companies entire focus was on production rather than any kind of "ethos of fun"
People want to pretend that all the folks at Nintendo are good family focused people, when in fact they have a history of rutheless capitalist practices. They didn't get into games due to passion... hell they tried a ton of different avenues to make money.
Nintendo is at the end of the day a very money driven publisher who has always used it's talent to try and capitalize on ideas.
Iwata being a developer himself brought a level of empathy into his role as CEO. He was a creative. He always saw creativity as something to protect. Before him all the other CEO's ruled Nintendo with a cold rutheless business regimine.
The Nintendo you see now has always been there... it's just that the golden years of Nintendo are over. They still hold onto some of their creatives... but like... much of what used to draw creatives to that company is gone.
Nintendo is no different than say... Konami. It doesn't foster creativity like it once did. There are sparks (DK is an insane game) left... but overall Nintendo might actually be cooking itself. The value of talent and creativity has begun to bleed away. What we're left with is a cold, calculated company who wants all of it's customers to only think of Nintendo when they buy and enjoy their products.
They have no interest in valuing and fostering talent in a healthy way. The talent "IS Nintendo" not the people who actually matter.
@romanista He viewed them as products because he had to. You can't just cherry pick facts. One of his biggest internal struggles was his love of art - but conflict because he needed to sell his works to live.
Also you need to seperate financial motive from the idea of art. Commodified art/culture is and always has been a consequence of power structures and hierarchies. Michaelangelo wasn't rich but his clients were. He needed money to survive because they made the system that way.
Thus he had to use the only skills he had to appease them for money.
We have normalized this transactional process and hierarchy so much that people just shrug and act like these famous artists were A-Okay philosophically with the system they were beholden to.
Many artists in history have notoriously despised the rich and their need to rely on them to survive. Sure they may have buckled but a few didn't and they died miserably.
It's the same now as it was then. Let's act like it should be completely normal to commodify art.
You cannot classify art as a product... That's the definition of commodification of culture.
It also happens to be the philosophical stance of modern day capitalism. For instance Nintendo justifies anti-consumer practices through this same lens. Yes. There can be a "positive" tilt to it, but in a world of commodities money is the ultimate ruler of what companies will do... and they are armed with psychologists (marketing specialists) who are trained and knowledgable in risk aversion and maximizing profit.
The part that gets to me here is that while "products" can be made in favor of the consumer, the consumer is a capitalist concept. As much as people roll their eyes at this stuff - it IS true.
The most hilarious and cruelest joke is Van Gogh! A guy who died poor, and peniless... yet his art is now traded by billionaires for tax breaks.
I think looking at any artform as a "product" to sell is cancerous to the idea that it is art. It's aligned closely with the idea of jusitfying AI art as a product.
Why shouldn't we cut out work by real artists? If it speeds up production and can match the same "quality" then why should we care? It's good for the consumer and the business!
It also just so happens to be the antithesis to human creativity and the idea of art as culture. It also happens to be something the wealthy have wanted for a millenia. Why pay a "filthy greedy artist" for a commission if I can have a robot do it?
Why do so many people dismiss this concept and idea that creative works of art are art. Even if it was made to please a more broad audience it is still art. However it should never be seen as a product.
Why do people go out of their way to defend massive corporations and capitalism?
80% of Nintendos revenue goes to its executives and board members. I don't pirate but I don't condemn every single instance of it as theft.
Nintendo will make plenty of money on their targeted demographic of kids, and casual gamers - the occasional tech savvy person who pirates the game isn't going to hurt their sales.
You're not helping Nintendo by saying things like this. Capitalism in its current form is pretty evil, and while I think piracy of smaller indie devs is definitely a no-no... I don't think doing the same thing to a bigger company is somehow inherently evil.
@Vexx234 Hate to break it to you but I watched somebody play through the entire thing last night and Nintendo themselves already spoiled all of those things through the marketing. There's not really anymore content than what they've shown outside a few level designs. Seriously.
@piichan That's the thing it's preachy. The game itself lacks a lot of depth that makes Pokemon so interesting for older kids, and adults. The thing is, you're taking it from one extreme to the next...
"Yep, too old for these kinds of games. When Pokemon came out, it was also labeled as kiddy, for babies, from gamers who were playing their half-life, starcraft, tomb raider and whatever "cool and grown up" games were popular in 1998." I don't play those games friend. I just feel that while Pokemon has an appeal that adults can enjoy, Youkai Watch does not.
The "clean up" and "do the right thing" message isn't really something adults here are going to be very interested in, unless they're naive, or just enjoy very childish shows I suppose.
And to the other guy, I know Youkai aren't "for children" yet children in Japan learn about them all the time. Even if they're "original" concepts... there's a lot there that's assumed of the audience. For instance in the show - a Kappa helps the main character... It's casually mentioned when asked his favorite food (which is Pizza...becuz NinjaTERTLESHURURHURHUR) by whisper "I thought Kappa's liked cucumbers" and if I was Japanese I'd get that immediately... because it's often said that Kappa's like cucumbers... however here the conversation is further removed - if I was an American kid I'd likely not remember that or think anything of it.
Pokemon does have Garbador and that kind of dumb stuff... but it doesn't resort to toilet humour, which Youkai Watch does constantly... for christ sake it's second episode goes there right away - AND "cheeksqueek" is in the opening... The thing is the world is crafted around Youkai causing mischief... Anyways.
I'm not going to argue marketing, and demographical theory with you. I think you will see in a year or two Youkai Watch won't be what Pokemon is here. Also Pokemon defeats that entire logic of "it's impossible to see the kind of success they saw in Japan, here." Pokemon is wildly successful here. It's still going, we never have problems with localization, and it took off like a rocket in the market the moment it dropped here, with even the TCG gaining traction.
Youkai Watch is a simplistic game, with a simplistic plot, simplistic characters, and I'm saying "Pokemon is deep man!" I'm saying Pokemon deals with fantasy better than Youkai Watch, which tries to teach kids "a moral" which has been PROVEN to have diminishing returns as far as audience. Pokemon so far still has a lot of kids interested. This is speaking strictly from a U.S. standpoint on the market.
Youkai Watch is popular in Japan, because YES kids there KNOW what they are. Here however.... kids have no clue... and the whole series is vague about them essentially being ghosts, which isn't entirely true.
It was a blockbuster because you're culture is already familiar with Youkai. They're part of your HUGE history, and Shinto mythos. See the thing is... here, ghosts aren't really kids bag. Youkai Watch succeeded where you are because it's innately a Japanese franchise, and concept. The monsters are in children's books and stuff already. Capitalizing on mythology is easy, and if you make it cutesy you've got a blockbuster - at least where that mythology is relevant. Many folks here in the states don't even know about Shintoism, and Shinto mythology.
Yes your toys helped, but medals don't interact with the game like you say they do - I know that for a fact. Some do with the arcade machines but we all know those won't come over here. To top all of this off... The localization team of the game and show took a gross out route with it. Sticking too closely with the source material. See here You might be popular with some little boys with all the fart humour and poop jokes... but that's been proven to only go so far. Teenagers will be immensely put off by it, and unfortunately that can't beat Pokemon here. Pokemon stays neutral, cute, and cool until the end. So what exactly are is Level 5 expecting over here?
There's no possible way it will gain in popularity compared to Pokemon. Most kids from my generation never really "out-grew" Pokemon where I don't really see that being a thing with this series. I honestly decided against getting this... and at first I was SUPER HYPE about it.
I love Shintoism and it looked cute... but then I peeped some of the Youkai... Snotsalong... CheekSqueak... Poop jokes... Fart jokes.... A Youkai that makes you have to pee... Eh.... This is literally made to be marketed to a VERY young demographic. Topping that off with the fact the game mostly plays itself, and you've got a game that I don't think has a mass audience here. I'm skipping it, I was going to get it... but all of the above along with the Voice Acting pretty much sealed the idea that this is not for adults... perhaps parents, but not adults who don't have kiddos.
Here's the thing. The show is filled with poop jokes, fart jokes, and generally boyish gross out humour. It doesn't have that same kind of appeal that pokemon has since it's based around Japanese folklore, and the characters don't ever really --- "battle" it's just filled with silly skits, and dialogue. Couple that with the fact that the Youkai are ghosts of dead animals, and people... and you've got a very niche market.
I've been seeing every possible site push to say that this will be bigger than Pokemon and here's why I can't see that happening here in the U.S...
For one despite Pokemon having SOME creepy elements, it's still relatively cute. Pokemon are essentially animals. The entire world is tailored around them, AND it's fairly gender neutral... with some Pokemon being super cute, while others might be cool dragons or martial artists... Pokemon had success because it doesn't limit who can like it. Youkai Watch seems to oriented primarily at boys - and it lacks the "cool" vibe that Pokemon has. Unfortunately I think Youkai Watch will be a miss over here. Some kids might get into it, but it's pretty childish, where Pokemon has this timelessness to it. Teenages are gym leaders, and it has the ability to appeal to more teen demographic as well as kiddos. So yeah...
The hope and articles that state that Youkai Watch will beat Pokemon obviously don't understand what made Pokemon so popular here. Youkai Watch can make butt, fart, poop, and snot jokes all day but collecting old men and women to fight for me is pretty weird and uninteresting even to kids.
Comments 12
Re: Miyamoto Views Games As 'Products', Not 'Works Of Art', Says Ex-Nintendo Dev
@Xansies and everything you just named such as marketing, and branding are all capitalist constructs, and concepts - NOT artistic ones.
This whole idea that financial motive is also tied deeply into art is false. It is only that way because people who are bad at art but good at capitalism have designed the system that way.
Art is art. It isn't tied to anything. We've been making art long before money as a concept even existed. When people would make art on cave walls with homemade paint and hues.
Art is as much a base part of humanity as language. We developed it as a sociological response to our evolution. We express ourselves through it. We express emotions through it. Something unique to humanity.
Meanwhile money, and capitalism are purely an idealistic and societal construct designed around how we engage with eachother (mostly in an effort to exert societal control)
Saying "you have to buy materials" isn't some fullstop proof that money is inherently tied to art.
The most powerful thing in human society IS art, and those with power (aka money) often abuse it to exert control and influence over it.
The entire argument of "art is both a product and art" is a flawed statement, because it's only product due to the system it exists within. From a larger anthropoligical point of view art is actually a "product of human creativity" and before you jump into a semantic minefield here --- product is also not inherently tied to capitalism. Human waste can also be defined as a product... My dandruff can be defined as a product, but it is not a capitalist product.
Production is simply the act of generation/transformation of materials into another form. It is a verb. To produce means to produce. It does not mean that it has a financial (which is capitalist term) value tied to it.
Humans use to art to express emotions, thoughts and feelings. To try and define art as a capitalist product kills the purpose of art, and what it truly is. That said real art will always exist despite these people. Always has, always will. Miyamoto is simply a cold-capitalist man - easy as that.
Re: Princess Peach's New Voice Actor Has Been Confirmed
The current Nintendo resembles the Nintendo before Iwata had become CEO.
People who don't know, Nintendo used to be quite rutheless in how they tackled business. This isn't news. Miyamoto used to go to Cabaret Clubs with his bosses and, even before his time the companies entire focus was on production rather than any kind of "ethos of fun"
People want to pretend that all the folks at Nintendo are good family focused people, when in fact they have a history of rutheless capitalist practices. They didn't get into games due to passion... hell they tried a ton of different avenues to make money.
Nintendo is at the end of the day a very money driven publisher who has always used it's talent to try and capitalize on ideas.
Iwata being a developer himself brought a level of empathy into his role as CEO. He was a creative. He always saw creativity as something to protect. Before him all the other CEO's ruled Nintendo with a cold rutheless business regimine.
The Nintendo you see now has always been there... it's just that the golden years of Nintendo are over. They still hold onto some of their creatives... but like... much of what used to draw creatives to that company is gone.
Nintendo is no different than say... Konami. It doesn't foster creativity like it once did. There are sparks (DK is an insane game) left... but overall Nintendo might actually be cooking itself. The value of talent and creativity has begun to bleed away. What we're left with is a cold, calculated company who wants all of it's customers to only think of Nintendo when they buy and enjoy their products.
They have no interest in valuing and fostering talent in a healthy way. The talent "IS Nintendo" not the people who actually matter.
Re: Miyamoto Views Games As 'Products', Not 'Works Of Art', Says Ex-Nintendo Dev
@romanista He viewed them as products because he had to. You can't just cherry pick facts. One of his biggest internal struggles was his love of art - but conflict because he needed to sell his works to live.
Re: Miyamoto Views Games As 'Products', Not 'Works Of Art', Says Ex-Nintendo Dev
@Xansies Not entirely to get paid.
Also you need to seperate financial motive from the idea of art. Commodified art/culture is and always has been a consequence of power structures and hierarchies. Michaelangelo wasn't rich but his clients were. He needed money to survive because they made the system that way.
Thus he had to use the only skills he had to appease them for money.
We have normalized this transactional process and hierarchy so much that people just shrug and act like these famous artists were A-Okay philosophically with the system they were beholden to.
Many artists in history have notoriously despised the rich and their need to rely on them to survive. Sure they may have buckled but a few didn't and they died miserably.
It's the same now as it was then. Let's act like it should be completely normal to commodify art.
Re: Miyamoto Views Games As 'Products', Not 'Works Of Art', Says Ex-Nintendo Dev
You cannot classify art as a product... That's the definition of commodification of culture.
It also happens to be the philosophical stance of modern day capitalism. For instance Nintendo justifies anti-consumer practices through this same lens. Yes. There can be a "positive" tilt to it, but in a world of commodities money is the ultimate ruler of what companies will do... and they are armed with psychologists (marketing specialists) who are trained and knowledgable in risk aversion and maximizing profit.
The part that gets to me here is that while "products" can be made in favor of the consumer, the consumer is a capitalist concept. As much as people roll their eyes at this stuff - it IS true.
The most hilarious and cruelest joke is Van Gogh! A guy who died poor, and peniless... yet his art is now traded by billionaires for tax breaks.
I think looking at any artform as a "product" to sell is cancerous to the idea that it is art. It's aligned closely with the idea of jusitfying AI art as a product.
Why shouldn't we cut out work by real artists? If it speeds up production and can match the same "quality" then why should we care? It's good for the consumer and the business!
It also just so happens to be the antithesis to human creativity and the idea of art as culture. It also happens to be something the wealthy have wanted for a millenia. Why pay a "filthy greedy artist" for a commission if I can have a robot do it?
Why do so many people dismiss this concept and idea that creative works of art are art. Even if it was made to please a more broad audience it is still art. However it should never be seen as a product.
Re: Round Up: The First Impressions Of 'Drag x Drive' For Switch 2 Are In
@WiltonRoots We were never shown the tofu. Splatoon was revealed as what we have. This was revealed this way. This is what you are getting lol.
Re: Japanese Charts: Xenoblade Chronicles X Arrives In Style And Sends Monster Hunter Packing
@Magician Good luck with that. The game runs like doo doo on PC and even has serious framerate issues on PS5 Pro
Re: Super Mario Bros. Wonder Leaked Online Ahead Of Next Week's Release
@RobynAlecksys
Why do people go out of their way to defend massive corporations and capitalism?
80% of Nintendos revenue goes to its executives and board members. I don't pirate but I don't condemn every single instance of it as theft.
Nintendo will make plenty of money on their targeted demographic of kids, and casual gamers - the occasional tech savvy person who pirates the game isn't going to hurt their sales.
You're not helping Nintendo by saying things like this. Capitalism in its current form is pretty evil, and while I think piracy of smaller indie devs is definitely a no-no... I don't think doing the same thing to a bigger company is somehow inherently evil.
What are you one of the guards from Aladin?
Re: Super Mario Bros. Wonder Leaked Online Ahead Of Next Week's Release
@Vexx234 Hate to break it to you but I watched somebody play through the entire thing last night and Nintendo themselves already spoiled all of those things through the marketing. There's not really anymore content than what they've shown outside a few level designs. Seriously.
Re: Akihiro Hino Explains Why Yo-Kai Watch Has Been So Successful and What Sets It Apart
@piichan That's the thing it's preachy. The game itself lacks a lot of depth that makes Pokemon so interesting for older kids, and adults. The thing is, you're taking it from one extreme to the next...
"Yep, too old for these kinds of games. When Pokemon came out, it was also labeled as kiddy, for babies, from gamers who were playing their half-life, starcraft, tomb raider and whatever "cool and grown up" games were popular in 1998." I don't play those games friend. I just feel that while Pokemon has an appeal that adults can enjoy, Youkai Watch does not.
The "clean up" and "do the right thing" message isn't really something adults here are going to be very interested in, unless they're naive, or just enjoy very childish shows I suppose.
And to the other guy, I know Youkai aren't "for children" yet children in Japan learn about them all the time. Even if they're "original" concepts... there's a lot there that's assumed of the audience. For instance in the show - a Kappa helps the main character... It's casually mentioned when asked his favorite food (which is Pizza...becuz NinjaTERTLESHURURHURHUR) by whisper "I thought Kappa's liked cucumbers" and if I was Japanese I'd get that immediately... because it's often said that Kappa's like cucumbers... however here the conversation is further removed - if I was an American kid I'd likely not remember that or think anything of it.
Pokemon does have Garbador and that kind of dumb stuff... but it doesn't resort to toilet humour, which Youkai Watch does constantly... for christ sake it's second episode goes there right away - AND "cheeksqueek" is in the opening... The thing is the world is crafted around Youkai causing mischief... Anyways.
I'm not going to argue marketing, and demographical theory with you. I think you will see in a year or two Youkai Watch won't be what Pokemon is here. Also Pokemon defeats that entire logic of "it's impossible to see the kind of success they saw in Japan, here." Pokemon is wildly successful here. It's still going, we never have problems with localization, and it took off like a rocket in the market the moment it dropped here, with even the TCG gaining traction.
Youkai Watch is a simplistic game, with a simplistic plot, simplistic characters, and I'm saying "Pokemon is deep man!" I'm saying Pokemon deals with fantasy better than Youkai Watch, which tries to teach kids "a moral" which has been PROVEN to have diminishing returns as far as audience. Pokemon so far still has a lot of kids interested. This is speaking strictly from a U.S. standpoint on the market.
Youkai Watch is popular in Japan, because YES kids there KNOW what they are. Here however.... kids have no clue... and the whole series is vague about them essentially being ghosts, which isn't entirely true.
Re: Akihiro Hino Explains Why Yo-Kai Watch Has Been So Successful and What Sets It Apart
It was a blockbuster because you're culture is already familiar with Youkai. They're part of your HUGE history, and Shinto mythos. See the thing is... here, ghosts aren't really kids bag. Youkai Watch succeeded where you are because it's innately a Japanese franchise, and concept. The monsters are in children's books and stuff already. Capitalizing on mythology is easy, and if you make it cutesy you've got a blockbuster - at least where that mythology is relevant. Many folks here in the states don't even know about Shintoism, and Shinto mythology.
Yes your toys helped, but medals don't interact with the game like you say they do - I know that for a fact. Some do with the arcade machines but we all know those won't come over here. To top all of this off... The localization team of the game and show took a gross out route with it. Sticking too closely with the source material. See here You might be popular with some little boys with all the fart humour and poop jokes... but that's been proven to only go so far. Teenagers will be immensely put off by it, and unfortunately that can't beat Pokemon here. Pokemon stays neutral, cute, and cool until the end. So what exactly are is Level 5 expecting over here?
There's no possible way it will gain in popularity compared to Pokemon. Most kids from my generation never really "out-grew" Pokemon where I don't really see that being a thing with this series. I honestly decided against getting this... and at first I was SUPER HYPE about it.
I love Shintoism and it looked cute... but then I peeped some of the Youkai... Snotsalong... CheekSqueak... Poop jokes... Fart jokes.... A Youkai that makes you have to pee... Eh.... This is literally made to be marketed to a VERY young demographic. Topping that off with the fact the game mostly plays itself, and you've got a game that I don't think has a mass audience here. I'm skipping it, I was going to get it... but all of the above along with the Voice Acting pretty much sealed the idea that this is not for adults... perhaps parents, but not adults who don't have kiddos.
Re: Orders for the Actual Yo-Kai Watch Toy Open on 6th November in North America
Here's the thing. The show is filled with poop jokes, fart jokes, and generally boyish gross out humour. It doesn't have that same kind of appeal that pokemon has since it's based around Japanese folklore, and the characters don't ever really --- "battle" it's just filled with silly skits, and dialogue. Couple that with the fact that the Youkai are ghosts of dead animals, and people... and you've got a very niche market.
I've been seeing every possible site push to say that this will be bigger than Pokemon and here's why I can't see that happening here in the U.S...
For one despite Pokemon having SOME creepy elements, it's still relatively cute. Pokemon are essentially animals. The entire world is tailored around them, AND it's fairly gender neutral... with some Pokemon being super cute, while others might be cool dragons or martial artists... Pokemon had success because it doesn't limit who can like it. Youkai Watch seems to oriented primarily at boys - and it lacks the "cool" vibe that Pokemon has. Unfortunately I think Youkai Watch will be a miss over here. Some kids might get into it, but it's pretty childish, where Pokemon has this timelessness to it. Teenages are gym leaders, and it has the ability to appeal to more teen demographic as well as kiddos. So yeah...
The hope and articles that state that Youkai Watch will beat Pokemon obviously don't understand what made Pokemon so popular here. Youkai Watch can make butt, fart, poop, and snot jokes all day but collecting old men and women to fight for me is pretty weird and uninteresting even to kids.