Reverse onion
megopie
My favorite example is from doctors notes, as doctors having unintelligible cursive appears to be a universal constant across the world.
Those regressive polices many wright off the south for exist in the rest of the country, but in different forms better suited to the context of the area. They come across as particularly brutal and overt to other areas simply because they’re not tailored to be hidden from them.
I’d say that animation has always had an issue in the US about having never been taken seriously as art and thus never really been funded well, outside of rare exceptions. The people currently working in the industry are working with in the constraints of what is available, and a lot of them do a pretty good job with in those constraints.
I don’t think that returning to purely hand drawn works is realistic or practical given the realities of the industry, nor necessarily desirable even with better budgets. The digital tools available certainly need to be better developed, and there are a lot of techniques that could be implemented to make better uses of the available budgets.
ah yes where would we be with out the artistic heights of bugs bunny. Clearly steven universe and gravity falls are complete artistic failures in comparison to that monument of cultural achievement.
To some extent it’s a result of how American animation has evolved to embrace animation software to reduce costs and moved away from hand drawn inbetween frames.
It’s not a bad thing, just an approach that leads to certain restrictions.
The State of Washington is a land of contradictions.
There are large areas that are very progressive and pro LGBTQ. Huge amounts of community organizing and routine public demonstrations. Genuinely quite strong community.
But the conservatives in the state are some of the furthest right in the country, they’ve been politically marginalized for some time now, but still have influence in a lot of institutions, particularly at the local level in some smaller towns and suburbs.
It gets overlooked because it always votes democrat, but the state has some serious internal political divides.
I think for a lot of larger publishers, they want the lock in and monetization that comes with stuff like battle passes or other such things that require an ongoing commitment.
But they also want the benefits of being “co-op” or other wise a cooperation focused multi player game. Namely that if you get one person in a friend group, you might drag in the rest of it as well. They also want the manipulative lock in, that if that is all your friends are playing, you’re kind of forced to play as well. Holding relationships hostage to maximize retention.
And that works to an extent, but it’s largely just wanting to have your cake and eat it to. If the game is commitment heavy, or heavily monetized, it’ll be much harder to get friends to start playing it let alone stick with it.
A game that has a low barrier to entry and does not insist upon commitment, will be much easier for a friend group to pick up. Big publishers salivate at the virality and broad adoption of these games, but also insist upon including the kinds of systems that work against it because including them is industry wisdom for how to “have a successful live service game that makes lots of money.”
Simony, complicate things.
F I B E R
It’ll be looked back on in a similar light to the Battle Creek sanatorium, Kellogg, and all the related quackery.