Should there be a mention in the Orson Scott Card entry on the reaction to the news that he was going to write a story for the "Adventures of Superman" anthology series? And how, because of it, the artist left and the story may never be published?

Does NISA fit as a Fallen Creator, the PS 3 era has been really bad for them, going from a respectable company to one that is shadow of it's former self. Neptunia, Mugen Souls and similar games have been received very negatively by critics everywhere.

The Brian Michael Bendis needs to be removed, last time I checked, he's still at Marvel writing for X-Men, and his books still sell huge. That bit just seems like complaining.

There needs to be an update for the Video Game section. Lucas Arts is now closed down after Disney aqquired Lucas Films due to lack of profit, sadly cancelling projects like Star Wars 1313.

I don't think Sean Connery should be included as last time I checked people had a rather favorable impression of him, even in spite of his questionable career.

While Square-Enix has been mentioned in passing I'd like to mention them directly. While not a 100% fallen creator due to their side publishing but for most of the RPG community, the Square side has effectively squandered what good will was left after X-2 and XII. I say Square side as it and its money grubbing president, Yoichi Wada are the problem areas. Enix and their series maintain their reputation in spite of this.

Its major falling points would be FFXIII, an obviously linear RPG with some redeeming traits and FFXIV an spiritual sequel to FFXI that had one hell of a bad start (and a major case of Never Live It Down) hence their attempted reboot of the game. This marked a vicious 180 towards the whole genre by the media/masses that once loved it.

The Kingdom hearts series while commercially successful, its plot line is becoming more and more tangled (due to its producer's insistence on surprises) is another factor.

Another strike against Square is how it's lesser known series (Mana, Sa Ga) were no longer released here at best (Sa Ga who enjoyed a good string of western releases since Sa Ga Frontier) and put out to pasture at worse (The Mana series after Dawn of Mana aka Kingdom Hearts testbed flopped.)

But the Coupe De Grace? Final Fantasy XIII-2 a game that proceeds take 20 steps backwards while walking 5 forward that many RPG fans have sworn off of Square.

It's to the point where Square is a joke in the RPG community compared to perhaps the biggest name during the days of the Snes and Playstation.

It won't entirely die but barring Wada getting removed and making a few miracles happen, it's highly unlikely that Square will recover its reputation among RP Gers any time soon. I'm surprised Enix hasn't tried selling Square yet.

The cause of the merger and likely Wada's tactics, The Spirits Within (written by Mr. Sakaguchi, producer of most of Final fantasty) should be noted, though Sakaguchi voluntarily resigned in wake of the movie flopping and some may consider him this though I would beg to differ mainly that his new company Mistwalker rarely gets high profile venues (they mainly made games for the 360 or Wii, systems ignored by most RP Gers) or sizable budgets among other things. So while their games may not be on par with Square's stuff, they're doing pretty good for the resources they do have. But until Mistwalker gets a good shot, I don't think Sakaguchi'll get his chance to recover.

Edit: I realize most of this has been coveread already. But I don't recall Dragon Quest getting pushed off to the side as the last few major games got releases in the US including Dragon Quest IX.

I would also like to remark that it's Rumored that the Chrono series is basically dead due to the DS port of Chrono Trigger didn't sell as much as Wada wanted (no duh seeing how it got one port already and Square Enix flooded the DS with RPG ports to such a point plans to release certain ones in the west got halted.)

A timeline of Square so to speak just to make up for it.

Pre-FF: Just a small note gaming company that came upon hard times.

FF 1: Saves square and helps form the jRPG genre

NES/GB era: Square experiments with its future games (Saga, Mana), most of which isn't seen in the west but the west would see the fruits later on.

Snes era: Square comes on to their own establishing themselves as a big name in jRPGs (with help from Nintendo) with Final Fantasy, Chrono Trigger, Secret of mana (as well as the games NOT released in the US) Only Enix is considered its equal (and that's with how their presence in the US got marginalized then)

PSX: Era the age of jRPG begins with Square as its ruler as well as a time of experimentation by Square, producing surprising hits and various japan only RPG series coming out in the west in addition to the grand return of Enix making an impact with Valkyrie profile, Star Ocean 2, and Dragon Quest 7.

The Spirits within: I can't say what was going on in Sakaguchi's mind when he wrote this, but after news of its failure hit, Square started to focus on money making. Around this time a new pecking order was established when it was clear only RP Gs with Square's graphics and budges would be the mega-hits, leading some aspiring companies to draw back, leaving Enix among a few others as competition.

PS 2 Era/Merger: Square's money making policies were in effect as there's no real experimentation to be seen for the most part with Kingdom Hearts's birth being a clear cash cow creation (that wasn't that bad). During this era, signs of jRPG excesses started to wear out their welcome such as long cinemas. It's assumed that Chrono Cross and Dawn of Mana were adversely affected by Square's policies while XII is all but outright confirmed for such a thing. Some could argue this is where Square's decline began though it was subtle at this point (mainly caused by XII and X-2).

PS 3/Post PS 2 era: This is where Square proceeds to decline at a high speed with over porting some of their classic hits, flooding the DS with so many RP Gs that its competition partially gave up their release plans, all the while with no sign of the DS remarks of the original Sa Ga/Final Fantasy Legend games. Square's mistakes along with ill timed rapid western releases of games made by the infamous Idea Factory, the age of RP Gs ended with a whimper.... and a teabagging (as the age of the Brown gritty FPS took over)

Can we remove the "To be fair" part from the Stephanie Meyer bit? I'm pretty sure its both a Justifying Edit and a violation of Repair Dont Respond

I'd debate Don Bluth being here, alot of people pretty much ignore his stinkers and still hold him highly for his good stuff.

Can someone add Silicon Knight's recent legal and financial situation to it's entry? What with them losing their lawsuit against Epic Games, subsequently being counter-sued and being made to pay them back millions of dollars and told to destroy all unsold copies of games built with the Unreal 3 Code, the company's essentially on life support now.

Why was Capcom removed? Look up "capcom worst company ever" and you'll find that since mid-2011, a ton of people have been claiming them to have gone downhill. So what if they're a "major and highly successful publisher"? So are EA and Activision, and they're widely despised among the gaming community. You can't deny that Street Fighter X Tekken, Dm C, Marvel VS Capcom 3, and Resident Evil 6 have been highly controversial, and the backlash over MML 3's cancellation was HUGE. They deserve a spot on the list.

Can some add another entry to Capcom's fallen creator category with the game being critically panned.

Can we please unlock this page, if only to clean up some of the brain-hemorrhagely stupid entires in the "Music" section? Especially the ones on Metallica, Anthrax and Sepultura; the first two being blatantly niche-opiniated, if not factually inaccurate (calling Load a "bad version of grunge" when the music is rootsy, blues-styled Hard Rock that has almost nothing to do with Grunge or Alternative Rock), the third being devoid of some very important details (Max Cavalera, the founder, frontman, band leader and chief songwriter leaving the band is pretty significant, to say the least).

The Roger Waters entry is especially heinous. True, The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking and Radio K.A.O.S. were commercial and critical flops, but his 1992 album Amused to Death has been wildly hailed as a Creator Comeback, and (along with The Final Cut) certainly more well received then the "Dehydrated Floyd" releases from Gilmour and co. (find me anyone willing to consider A Momentary Lapse of Reason anything more than a colossal mistake.

While we're on the topic of potential candidates, Clint Eastwood's, uh, "performance" at the RNC gives him a good chance of landing here, I might say. Let's see whether or not it tanks his next film.

Since it's locked... how about John Woo? Acclaimed Hong Kong action director. Successful crossover films. And after M:I:2, flopped twice, and resorted to a Chinese comeback and a videogame.

From the above, I understand why it's locked, but will someone please fix the spelling under the Lindsay Lohan bit? Is like fingernails on eyeballs...

Why is this being removed?

• While we're on the subject of video game publishers, we have Electronic Arts (EA) which publishes noteworthy titles such as EA Sports, Battlefield, The Sims, Medal Of Honor, Command And Conquer, Dead Space, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age. However, recently they have come under fire from several sources after buying Bioware and releasing Dragon Age II, which many hated for it's linearity (everything you do makes things worse) and divergence from the gameplay structure of the first game. EA's guilt in this? Certain implications that they rushed the game while it was on early beta. This was made worse with draconian DRM, including the Origin service, which lacks the features available on Steam, runs poorly, and periodically scans the user's hard drive as well as removing all future EA games from it, forcing you to use the service. The capper was Mass Effect 3's Gainax Ending. Ever since people started reaching the end, accusations have been flying about EA rushing Bioware, leading to a incomprehensible, plothole-ridden, and just depressing ending. This has cause stock prices for EA to drop and the company to recieve the "2012 Worst Company in America Golden Poo Award". And that was after they were previously known for killing off Pandemic, Bullfrog, Westwood and Maxis completely.

Removing this - again:

• Bioware was noted for making a great deal of excellent CRPGs and the universally praised Dragon Age and Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic which was a retelling of A New Hope set in the Old Republic. However, Dragon Age 2 was not for its extreme railroading, repetitiveness and alienating the fanbase when Bioware could not handle the criticism properly and suffering from Internet Backlash as a result. Bioware since then has a lost a great deal of respect and Star Wars The Old Republic is seen as a sinking ship where it is seen as an expensive attempt at challenging World Of Warcraft for its crown only to see 300 million dollars go down the drain and desperate attempts to keep it from sinking. While Mass Effect 3 was critically acclaimed by critics, many fans felt extremely dissatisfied with a variety of things and Bioware definitely lost respect from its fans in what was supposed to be a celebrated final entry to the trilogy.

Yes, I know - everyone and their mother hates the ending of Mass Effect 3. You have no argument from me here. However, the game still sold close to 2 million copies in its first week. It's the highest selling title of the trilogy. Almost everyone who played the game said it was amazing up until the final 10 minutes.

This example was already deleted, not only by myself, but from several other users because it's the hardcore fanbase complaining about how Bioware Jumped The Shark because it's owned by EA (and a user was banned for continually readding it, even when his points were proven to be misleading). If there comes a time when a game sells far, far below their sales expectations and is critically panned, and it happens more than once, it would be an example. Even SWTOR has proven to be moderately successful from a "new IP" point of view. As it stands, they are still monumentally successful in terms of sales earnings.

I am deciding to follow up on the whole Bioware Fallen Creator Status. There had been a lot more haters and a lot of Internet Counterattacks going on at the forums. The only reason why game journalism won't attack them is because they are paid for by EA to keep quiet and give them 9-10 point ratings. Or didn't you notice how EA now implemented a zero tolerance policy towards anyone dissenting on their forums about their games?

About Bioware becoming fallen creators, didn't you heard about places like Game FA Qs and Something Awful have been recently devoting all of their hate towards Dragon Age 2 and newer franchises for destroying all they stood for. Talking about horror stories about how Bioware silence anyone who dares to even criticize their games in a style that is Brezhnev's "Silence everyone, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil".

Bioware has fallen and only the game reviewers who were paid by Electronic Arts to keep them from ripping the game to shreds would speak negative things about it. Or did Gerstgate not reminds you what happens when you try to turn against the game creators by supporting a deviant opinion.

Geoff Johns does NOT belong on this page. He's a big writer still and his stuff is mostly acclaimed by fans and critics. Brightest Day is an exception, but it hasn't caused a huge hit to his prestige like Bendis has taken.

Moreover, some of that explanation is irrational. Jaime Reyes is 'The Wesley?' His comic wasn't commercially successful, but it was a critical smash hit and Jaime became a breakout character through it. How is it Johns' fault Jim Lee is a slow artist?

I changed the entry on Chris Claremont just slightly because one portion of it, I felt, had Unfortunate Implications.

• Chris Claremont suffers this, as much of his writing style (insanely strong female characters, overly-complex storylines that go on and on and on, and plots that routinely revolve around mind control and BDSM) haven't aged well at all since the 1980s. Granted, most of this is also due to the fact that Claremont's writing style has been aped and homaged upon by so many writers since his first run on the X-Men.

I emphasize the line I removed. Now, tell me, what is wrong with strong female characters? I thought TV Tropes was not sexist. Does this mean comic book readers are sexist? I don't think so. Many readers, both male and female, are just as tired of Women In Refrigerators, Chickification, Standard Female Grab Area, Disposable Woman, and Faux Action Girl as I am.

I'm reminded of something Interactive Fiction author Sarah Morayatti said in an interview: "If a smash hit has mostly male characters, no one raises an eyebrow, but if it has mostly female characters, it's a Great Big Anomaly worth several trees' worth of shocked speculation."

Yes, the X-Men books in Claremont's heyday had lots of strong female characters. But I do not see why this is, or should be, a bad thing.

As for the rest, I'd have to agree that Claremont DID over-use certain plot elements. And he DID seem to plan too much for 'the real long term' not even thinking about how changes in Marvel editorial would affect those long-term plans. The latter part of his run on the X-books had him facing plenty of Executive Meddling (which involved, among other things, the original creation of X-Factor), and his original ideas for the backstories of Mystique and Mr. Sinister ended up never seeing print.

Anyway, his more recent work certainly isn't as highly regarded as his 80's X-Men work. A number of fans didn't care for his run on Exiles, and his X-Men Forever (set in an alternate reality) lost a number of people after issue #5 due to its 'mutant powers are killing them' revelation. So yes, I'd say he probably should be listed here.

But 'strong female characters' shouldn't be one of the reasons why.

Question: would Capcom fit on this pade? There's been a lot of controversy over the blatant plagiarism of Splosion Man (with MaXplosion), to the point that people have even outright said "fuck you" to Capcom (over the internet but still). We might have to wait and see, but the signs are beginning to show.

Is the entry on Yoshio Sakamoto really necessary? The "fall" was just a single game of passable quality that is far from universally reviled by the fanbase. Only if the trend gets larger, say, with a game that's actually bad, will the entry serve any purpose.

• Takeshi Kitano, who states he can no longer take his early, inventive Yakuza films seriously, and plunges headlong into cloying sentimentality (Dolls) or solipsistic surrealism (Takeshis').
  • Your Mileage May Vary. Although his work has changed considerably, Kitano's new films are mostly well-regarded: he continues to win festival awards and is held in high esteem by critics.

Anyone want to elaborate on this. I noticed that the initial bit hasn't gone into detail.

Why is there only a Darth Wiki for this? I seem to recall there being a real entry before?

Does the Harvey Dent quote "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain" really fit here? Fallen creator seems more about losing ones talent, not becoming evil

Okay, since people are arguing a lot about whether Joss Whedon should be here, I think its fair game to discuss him.

For reference, the last time he came up, I made the comment that since Dollhouse hadn't even premiered (then), it was unfair to judge him until we saw how it did. Since Dollhouse crashed and burned, he got re-added and I didn't argue since it does seem to be a pretty nasty slump for him.

On the other hand, he's also continued to have successes buried in there and continues to get employment. A long-term bout of fan friction isn't necessarily the bullet to the head unless its particularly harsh.

So let's discuss him here and now, post-Dollhouse and on the cusp of another Doctor Horrible project.

"The other main designer on Doom, John Carmack fared much better than Romero initially, with Quake II and III and Return to Castle Wolfenstein being major hits. However, the reputation of both Carmack and iD Software in general has been heading steadily downhill since then; Doom 3 was commercially successful, but not particularly well received by the gaming community, Quake 4 failed to match up to expectations, and both Enemy Territory: Quake Wars and Wolfenstein were huge failures. All this, combined with the vaporware status of Rage, has left both Carmack and iD with a reputation that's barely any better than that of Romero."

All I can say is lolwut? Doom 3 has 3 generally positive ratings on gaming websites, even if it do have a fair Hate Dom among older Doom fans. ET:QW was a top seller in both the UK and the US and it still has a reasonably active community today (The console ports did flop but iD wasn't behind them). The Wolfenstein reboot wasn't by them, and neither was Quake 4 (which still performed very well) for that matter. Even if iD's reputation isn't as sterling as it used to, saying it's "barely better than Romero" seems to be very exagerated... in my experience, anyway.