Follow TV Tropes
Can we add John Lasseter onto the list? People used to love him, but ever since his sexual harassment allegations in 2017, people have been boycotting him greatly.
In the Peter Sellers entry, the last line says \"... but in a piece of incredibly good timing, he died a month before it was released.\" I suggest this be linked to the Black Comedy page.
What happened to the entry on Chuck Austen?
Coming back once again to remind the mods that Eric Chahi should not be on this page as he has remained highly regarded by his fans consistently throughout his career, and the line that Amazing Studio went backrupt is just straight up misinformation that has been spread despite there being no truth to it. It\'s completely fabricated and there has never been any evidence to suggest it.
I think Tadayoshi Yamamuro should get a mention. He was the most beloved animation supervisor during Dragon Ball Z, but his style took a heavy decline since the 2000\'s. When Batle of Gods was announced, an animator outright called his designs bad and when he debuted as a storyboard artist and supervisor for Resurrection of F, he was criticized by many for how uninspired it was with one animator calling him a \"big fish in a small pound that doesn\'t expand beyond one series\", and how cheaply-looking his designs were (with the highlights being the most common source of complain). Yamamuro was replaced by animator Naohiro Shintani for Dragon Ball Super Broly with him relegated to Dragon Ball Heroes
Should George Lucas be removed? TCW was very well received season 2 onwards and the Prequels are kinda vindicated by history, especially with the ST being much more polarizing and the popularity of stuff like prequel memes. There is a growing consensus that he at least had good ideas but maybe couldn\'t write properly. Also note the speaking out more by PT fans, as well as existence of interpretations of PT and his ideas that have kinda vindicated him(ie: Ring Theory)
What does everyone think about adding in Telltale Games? The fact that the company suddenly fell apart in the span of a year and its explosive revelations over it... well...
For the Wachowskis\' entry, we should probably add Jupiter Ascending and Sense 8—the former because it represented their low point in terms of reputation, the latter because it finally got them into Win Back The Crowd territory.
Would Gearbox count as this? They went from the sizable success of borderlands and into obscurity.
There were some blows; the controversy over using funds meant for Alien Colonial Marines towards Borderlands 2, some of the things Borderlands 2/Pre S did, and Battleborn getting smashed by overwatch (not so much Gearbox\'s fault in this case). And then there was someone of the stuff some key staffers said. Last I heard they were trying to push a TCG/FPS or such.
I don\'t blame Duke Nukem Forever\'s flop on them as they mainly finished what was started, and they did make a patch enabling more weapons for the PC ver.
Is it too soon to consider Butch Hartman a Fallen Creator? Recently, he started a controversial Kickstarter for a service called Oaxis, that did not clearly define what it was going to be about. Things turned nasty toward the end of the Kickstarter, when it was discovered that the service would have Christian values - something Hartman NEVER disclosed in any materials related to the Kickstarter, leading to a number of his fans feeling lied and deceived to. Not helping matters at all is his response to criticism of the Kickstarter, rejecting any input from those who aren\'t in animation because they haven\'t done anything with their lives; as well as his remarks on suicide, which include saying that it was invented by the media and didn\'t exist when he was a kid and a joke about how Mary Kay Bergman committed suicide because of Tara Strong.
Perhaps it is a bit too soon. Sure, Butch Hartman may have caused some controversy, but at least he didn\'t sexually harass anyone. IMO, the OAXIS Entertainment controversy is just a minor crime compared to John Kricfalusi\'s Fallen Creator status in March of 2018. Who knows, maybe when OAXIS launches with a positive reception, it could probably serve as a Career Ressurection for Butch Hartman, assuming there will be no more discriminating stuff against him in the meantime.
This was under Valve\'s YMMV page (I removed it for being Flame Bait):
This look legit enough to add?
Not sure if Value would count; sure things are mixed, but even now its overall library is only removely rivaled by Go G. It\'d take something that has both mainstream and indie games to rival it. And on the last thing, the whole Porn game take down got undone with an apology.
The Mark Millar example includes the following sentence:
"Nowadays, he produces bloody works such as The Unfunnies, Kick-Ass, The Ultimates, and Wanted, that featured Sociopathic Hero characters and Strawman Political arguments."
I suggest that "nowadays" be changed to "at the height of his fame" and that the sentence be written in the past tense, as Millar has since mellowed somewhat and has produced relatively more colourful and upbeat works such as Huck, Reborn and Jupiter's Legacy.
Do such requests at the \"Locked Pages: Lock, UnLock and Edit requests\" forum.
It says \"404 Not Found\".
At the search bar, it appears https://tvtropes.org/\'https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=gsjp7dldjh2dwdelcha2hu17\'. Delete the initial https://tvtropes.org/\' and the \'. Or else, search it at the forums.
Though it can be debatable, but director Bob Clark was once this. He started off directing 70's and early 80's cult classics like Children shouldn't play with dead things, Black Christmas, Porky's and A Christmas Story. But then he directed Rhinestone which was nominated for a few razzies, including worst director for Clark, and from the mid-80s and throughout the early 2000's he was basically a director-for-hire, even directing the panned Baby Geniuses films. He was about to make a comeback in the late 2000's with a remake of his earlier films, but sadly it never happened, Bob Clark was tragically killed in a car accident in 2007.
I'm thinking we should add Allison Mack to the list. Getting slapped with federal crimes related to running a sex slave cult would probably qualify her as "fallen" for most people.
We should add a section to the Matt Hardy entry about how he managed to Win Back the Crowd with his “broken” gimmick.
Too soon to tell, but I think that Doug Walker (aka the nostalgia critic) and Channel Awesome in general might be heading this way due to allegations about mismanagement and abuse from their former content creators for almost a whole decade.
Same with Jew Wario. I never watched his videos proper myself, but I do remember how highly the other TGWTG producers and fans thought of him after his suicide. But at least two women have come forward accusing him of grooming and sexual assault, and it's been hinted there may be more accusers coming. So far much of the former TGWTG fanbase has been inclined to believe the accusers and turn against Jew Wario.
Things seem to be taking a turn for the worse. Channel Awesome posted a response to these accusations, which done more harm than good. Just to rub salt to the wound, many of the sites producers left shortly after, leaving ONLY TWO producers on that site now.
If you want to, you can go to the forum for locked pages and propose they be the first Web original examples.
Channel Awesome has lost most of its contributors and even people who don't approve of some of the former contributors that did the "Not So Awesome" document agree Michaud was a terrible person. About Doug himself, though, I think it would take time first.
Well, things seem to be getting worse for John Kricfalusi, with all the allegations of him sexual harassing two underage females.
Mel Gibson - As of late, he seems to be making a bit of a comeback. His recent directorial effort, Hacksaw Ridge, was commercial success and earn a number of oscar nominations including best picture. Also, while his inclusion in Daddy's Home 2 did face some controversy and the film wasn't particularly well received by critics, it still proved to be commercially successful.
Guy Ritchie - His section stops at the Sherlock holmes films but doesn't mention The Man from Unkle (while somewhat critically successful, it was a commercial flop) or his King Arthur film (an even bigger commercial flop).
For M Night Shyamalan, would it be worth noting that his most recent film, Film/Split was a commercial success and was amongst his better received films?
Should we revive the Joss Whedon section? It as removed a while back, and he seemed to have regained the majority of fan-love, but after the Wonder Woman script, Justice League, and the affairs and emotional abuse that his ex-wife revealed, not to mention the burnout he suffered after Age of Ultron (though that one at least seems to have been a Vocal Minority), I'm wondering if there's enough negativity to justify putting him here.
At this point, I'm not sure I've seen anyone thrilled about him making a Batgirl movie; half a decade ago people would've been jumping for joy at that, but right now the only people who seem to be excited are just people that want to see Burnside!Batgirl made into a movie.
I would nominate the Spoony One for one. He's barely put out any new content over the last couple years and his fans have all but turned against him (seriously look at the Spoony Experiment subreddit). His good days have clearly passed.
Based off of what's listed on Konami's part in the video games folder, I believe that EA's part should also be updated to include Mass Effect Andromeda and Star Wars Battlefront 2's even further negative impact on the company.
Is it save to put Seth Macfarlene on this list. He's not exactly the Golden Boy like he was in the 2000s. And his movie career isn't much better.
The Orville did well in the ratings, despite having him as both the creator and leading man, so I'm not sure we can claim that he's fallen yet.
I would like to recommend Marion Zimmer Bradley for this list. As vital as she was to the fantasy genre, her reputation has essentially been ruined after she was discovered to be a sexual predator that targeted her own children and those of others. It's a lot more grim than many other examples on the page, but I think it's something that needs to be said.
Can we remove the entry of Square Enix? I think its a bit outdated because of more recent events like Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn and Final Fantasy XV's success.
Seconded. Frankly, the whole Video Games section needs some serious cleanup—probably the whole page. There are a whole lot of examples that are just developers hitting a rough patch and then immediately getting better. I can easily see Hideo Kojima being on here after MGS 2 before MGS 3 fixed his reputation again.
I agree. Eric Chahi's section even has an outright untrue statement saying "his" (he was a co-founder not the sole owner) studio went bankrupt when all that happened was he left the studio to study volcanoes. It's just full of made up information or YMMV
I'm glad we're on the same page. Let's start by removing the entry of Square Enix.
Also, we conder adding potential entries in the Video Game section of this like Bungie and Microsoft.
Yeah those two games have turned things around some for Square, that and Nier Automna which they published was also quite successful. Can\'t say they\'ve completely recovered, but there\'s clear hope of it.
Can there be a section on Takashi Iisuka, current head of Sonic team? I mean, he went from leading designer of the original Ni GHTS to Shadow. That's kinda hitting rock bottom.
That needs a lot more elaboration.
i did some reediting on Demongodofchaos 2's Inafune example. hope this is OK:
edit: the post above has been fixed for links and formatting (can't actually do paragraphs in the discussion page because... coding, i guess?)
I would like to recommend David Crononberg for this page.
Why? Please provide more info.
I think the section on Gunpei Yokoi needs to be revised for a number of reasons, mostly that it's based on misconceptions and incomplete information. For one thing, he didn't leave Nintendo because of disgrace or mistreatment; he actually stayed longer so that it wouldn't appear that he was fired due to the failure. He'd been planning to resign for some time, and the Virtual Boy was meant to be his Swan's Song for the company. His movement to a less important position and his manning the trade show booth were both at least in part his ideas so that he'd still be useful to the company while waiting for things to die down. And last but not least, Nintendo hasn't forgotten the Virtual Boy. It was included in the Japanese version of Super Smash Bros. Melee in the trophy gallery, and Nintendo of America in particular have embraced it as a joking self-deprecation.
Not to mention his reputation is generally seen very highly regardless how the Viruta Boy did.
Should we add details about how Square Enix has managed to Win Back the Crowd?
Here's my Keiji Inafune entry, which I also submitted under locked pages, I'm pasting it here as well:
Any possible edits that might be needed can be done by a moderator if they have to when they add it.
For starter, please check Example Indentation in Trope Lists.
Ok, Did some editing.
Can someone expand the Ken Penders one to make it clear the extent of the damage his lawsuit did?
It resulted in the whole comic being rebooted and several well-received characters removed because Archie got scarred and not only pulled his creations but any characters made by ex-staff lest someone try to replay his actions.
He also managed to sabotage Ben Hursts attempts to get a Sat AM movie made to give the story closure by jumping the gun and telling Sega to soon. He then blamed Ben Hurst and claimed "he didn't know how the industry worked" or something to that effect.
The dude is the Frank Miller of Sonic comics.
I'd like to clean up Lindsay Lohan's section, and maybe modify Tom Cruise's where it won't be as Natter-y
Video Games folder
1. In Creator/Interplay entry, is there any reason Free Space 2's paragraph has to be bolded? Is it clerical error, or the part really need to be emphasized?
2. Eric Chahi's entry lacking "public opinion has turned against these people" part. His "killer" (Heart of Darkness) actually sold well. And he does return with From Dust. I don't think he count.
Can confirm about Eric Chahi. He does not belong on this list and I'd implore any mods to remove him. He left the video game industry not because of a failure, but because he had been working almost constantly on projects for nearly a decade. There was very little break between the development of Another World and of Heart of Darkness. After the release of the game he left the studio (which was a joint project, not founded entirely by him) and spent the his earnings pursuing his interest in geology and volcanoes. Eventually once the new indie scene was well underway he returned with the idea to create a game where magma could be used to influence a sandbox game; From Dust.
Not only did Heart of Darkness sell well enough to warrant a platinum release in the UK, but it received "good" scores averaging out around 75-80% with slightly lower scores for the PC version due to less colors.
Heart of Darkness is still regarded as a classic in retrogaming circles and has inspired many modern indie devs such as Playdead (Limbo and Inside) and whilst the game had a considerably blown up amount of hype back when it was in development that didn't really go anywhere once it was actually released, the game was well received. Just not "perfect game of the year" status.
Amazing Studio, the team that made the game also did not go bankrupt. They simply left the video game industry and eventually re-branded to "Amazing Digital Studio" because of a serious shift in the way games were made. (In the 80s to early 90s many games could easily be made by a couple of friends in a basement) which became impossible with the race for better and better 3D graphics. Upon release Heart of Darkness was only somewhat dated, and the main criticism was actually how short the game was and how it was a 2D sidescroller when most games at the time were completely 3D. Eric Chahi's fans generally like Heart of Darkness. It was a solid game that improved on some of the programming flaws of Another World.
And looking at how this page is locked I see no way to remove it. I've been to the Locked Pages request page but see no way to post there. It's a real shame. Even if just the part saying the studio went bankrupt got removed would be better than nothing. People have been spreading that EVERYWHERE and the studio is still around. Just in the film industry now.
alright. I have posted in the locked pages request discussion about the subject of my previous post. Perhaps I should have linked to my post here there as well. Admittedly I'm a longtime lurker and first time poster here so I fully expect I'm going about this in a less than stellar way.
Dig up. Anybody want to object removing Eric Chahi? If no, I will give another shot a few days later. Ironically, Fallen Creator thread I found in forum is locked since for being unneeded.
We need to clear the flood of red links in this article.
...they are not red links all the links appear red on the Darth Wiki even if they link to pages
I meant light red links.
Think Kenji Inafune is at risk for this considering the seeming fiasco that is Mighty No.9's launch?
As it is, various fans have lost their esteem in him, though for some it's merely the last straw on top of the Red Ash debacle, the various delays and troubled production of Mighty No.9. It lead to remarks like "If he was a robot master, he'd be Con Man"
I'm in the camp of "let's see how this plays out" but I'm not too sure if he and Compsect would even get the chance.
Can Tom Cruise's entry be removed? The guy had a Career Resurrection — the fact of which is even stated in his entry, making it look nattery.
If you want edit done to a locked page, you have to ask in the Locked Pages thread
For the Newspaper Comics genre, I think D.C. Simpson should be removed. That strip she was developing with a syndicate finally launched, being christened "Phoebe and Her Unicorn" (originally titled "Heavenly Nostrils").
The comic strip is something of a hit, having managed to get a sizeable newspaper list, with critical praise from readers and comics critics. There has been several book collections published, and one of them (Unicorn vs. Goblins) actually made it to the New York Times Bestseller List for a brief time - http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/2016-03-13/paperback-graphic-books/list.html
So yeah, D.C. Simpson managed to recover from the "Raine Dog" fiasco and is well regarded now.
I think Josh Trank from Fantastic Four (2015) career should be listed. According to the Wikipedia page: "As of today, Trank has no new projects lined up and no Hollywood studio wants to work with him. His notoriety as such firmly placed him in director's jail, a pariah locked out of studio directing opportunities for the indefinite future. One anonymous Hollywood executive told the Hollywood Reporter, "No executive will go near him. I might take a meeting with him, just to give him advice, but I wouldn't give him a job." The Hollywood Reporter suggests that the only way Trank will ever be allowed another shot at directing is to apologize, eat humble pie, and go back to his low budget roots. He might also try writing a great script or going the television route but even that's a long shot."
On a side note, Robert Zemeckis' entry needs some updating. It has been 3 years since his Flight movie came out.
I'm in agreement.
Does Bendis still belong on this page? For all that the fans hate him, his books still sell and, as of April 2016, I've seen no signs that Marvel is planning to oust him anytime soon - hell, he's writing their big event book for the year.
I don't like Bendis's Marvel work, but I've tried arguing for his removal before.
While we're discussing comics, ...
I've also argued that the section about Hush on Loeb's page should also be removed, since it's one of the most popular Batman books, probably only behind the classics like Killing Joke and The Dark Knight Returns, and saying that people who like it only like it for the art is straight up bullshit (and the Hush character was popular way before Dini used him).
The line about Mark Millar's "ultra-conservative views" should also definitely go, since he's definitely more liberal leaning than anything. This is straight from the horse's mouth). (Which means that entire first half of that paragraph should be rewritten, since his works are meant to be full of satire and irony).
It's not about simply disagreeing, it's about removing factual inaccuracies, including one that's misrepresenting the beliefs of a real life person.
I think it could be argued that the Chris Carter entry should be updated due to the X-Files revival. While it has been generally well-received, it's been argued that the episodes written and directed by Carter have been the worst of the lot. http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/chris-carter-created-the-x-files-and-was-by-far-the-worst-part-of-the-revival
Also this: http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/did-the-x-files-revival-permanently-damage-chris-carters-reputation-20160223
And this: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/02/the-x-files-do-we-still-want-to-believe/470541/
A relevant quote from the latter article: "We need to give Chris Carter the George Lucas treatment. Thank him for all he’s done, present him with a gold watch, and get him as far away from this show as possible."
I would like to add DJ Shadow to this list. During mid-90s, he was a key figure in the development of sampling and plunderphonics, and his album "Endtroducing" is still regarded as the definitive instrumental hip-hop release, being frequently ranked in professional lists of the all-time greatest albums. Nowadays, he became an unrelevant, "behind the times" DJ who was, among other things, kicked off the decks from his own performance in Miami, and most of his modern releases are mediocre trap/jerk hop tracks without any sense of creativity or musical complexity that prevailed in his earlier works. Rate Your Music page on him ( https://rateyourmusic.com/artist/dj_shadow ) displays his decline in quality and popularity over the years.
Might want to ask here.
There is a horribly obnoxious amount of redlinks, and a this page is now locked, could someone possibly fix that?
Not sure why they need a fix, redlinks are a natural page component and there don't seem to be so many.
should Keiji Inafune be added to the Video Games folder? his name became a joke after the PR disasters that were Mighty No. 9 and Red Ash, and Re Core was quickly forgotten about after its E3 reveal
You need to be more specific then that.
Konami and all its PR disasters are going the same way, but they aren't there just yet.
Let a mod know what they think.
We are not in a hurry to add any videogame company to this page. I think people tend to jump the gun on declaring these as "fallen".
With regards to Konami, I think the fact that they've alienated the entire holy Trinity of Igarashi, Kojima and Yamaoka is a pretty sure sign that they're not the company they once were. Surely causing the leaders of the projects that made the company great to leave the company in disgust qualifies as "falling".
Nah, that seems more like Creative Differences than this.
I would disagree, it's pretty unanimously agreed that
a: Konami's executives have been acting like incompetent assholes for the past few years, and that
b: It's been to the immense detriment of every beloved franchise they own.
They've quite clearly been slowly losing the capacity to create the kinds of games that made them great to begin with, and alienating the people who helped make those games great out of sheer short-sightedly greedy arrogance has a lot to do with it.
That's a lot of assertions about the executives that make me a little sceptical. You'll have to ask on this topic for an addition, if anywhere at all.
I guess it's because of how Inafune shamelessly abused the trust of Mega Man fans and gave them false hope since Capcom has been giving the franchise the cold shoulder for the past decade. Ironically, what Inafune is doing is possibly worse than what Capcom has done with Mega Man.
@ Septimus Heap. Geoff Kieghly on The Game Awards 2015 live on stage that Konami outright banned Hideo Kojima from going to the event, which celebrates the whole industry.
Creative Differences only my butt.
Yeah what they did to Kojima at this year's TGA is something pretty unanimously agreed on as cruel. Can't think of any way to get around justifying that as anything other than Kick the Dog. Besides, the statements that Konami plans to withdraw entirely from the very video game sphere which it used to be known primarily as a creator for are already putting there.
Folks, this is not a forum to discuss videogame companies. If you want to propose an example, you need to come to the Locked Pages thread.
Well, I do think that it's important that they come to a consensus here before trying to get the example added. Based on everything I've heard, Konami definitely applies as of late. Does anyone have a suggested writeup?
I'm not that good at doing stuff like that, myself.
Just a quick writeup:
I think it sounds pretty good as a basic summary. Get rid of the second "in 2014" though.
The bit about Inafune is more revelant in light of how Mighty No.9 came out (wound up making a post earlier as I wound up overlooking this.
I have an idea to have to add to your writeup, Larkmarn. "The company had become one of the biggest, most despised punchlines in the history of video games and a major example of everything wrong with the AAA industry and the video game industry in general." What do you think?
"Major example of everything wrong with the AAA industry and the video game industry in general" sounds way too hyperbolic.
Requesting permission to add Larkmann's statement into the Locked Pages topic to be evaluated? It has gone quite long enough and honestly, I'm not seeing any events that the fans' views on Konami restored, since Konami continued to dig the hole in their grave without care of what gamers think, including how Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater is turned into a pachinko game and then went to be the third most disliked video of all youtube, and continued with Metal Gear Survive...
It's been a year already, why isn't the above entry on Konami on the page already?
You know this page is permanently locked and needs permission from the 'Locked Page' topic in the FAQ thread.
Well, first it needs to be reworked and the grammar is under fixing. Can use your help here.
EDIT: Job's done.
I think Fireball 20 XL belongs here, and I even have a rough draft for its potential submission.
Can we add an entry for Bill Cosby? His reputation has been successfully tarnished thanks to all the accusations he received for being a rapist. With all the bad press, he will never restore his image anytime soon.
I have some doubts about adding an example on grounds other than the quality of his works.
Even though things like Fatty Arbuckle and such are there? Though I think we should give it time to see how his career fares, though to be fair, he's been sort of going by and only getting a bit of infamny for his rants that one time.
Could someone update the Entries for The Wachowsis and Robin Williams?
And add Adam Sandler, while you're at it.
Hum? How update?
For the Wachoswis, could someone put their new movie, Juptier ascending.
Robin Williams is getting better press, since he died.
That's not enought context to write up examples.
That might be something about impact compared to career (Robin W Illiams)
Given that EA sells millions of games year after year, which hasn't changed despite Hate Dumb, it is wrong to refer to them as a "Fallen Creator" on this page. This particular entry was blatantly written by someone who didn't get exactly what they wanted from DA 2 or ME 3 and decided it was EA's fault.
In lieu of this interview, it seems a correction must be made regarding Denis Dyack.
A few more details?
Read the interview. Turns out the situation regarding X-Men: Destiny was not him being egotistically obsessed with funding his Eternal Darkness sequel, but was instead him and his team being strangled by a dueling-company case of Executive Meddling between Disney and Activision resulting in NOBODY getting paid for working on it.
I need an actual rewrite for the entry, sorry.
That one works (length aside). I've put it in.
As the person who originally had the article changed, I dispute nomoru's edit. Why is Dyack's word worth more than the former employees? The initial Kotaku interview by former employees paint a lot of problems at SK as being Dyack's fault, and this interview is Dyack claiming that Kotaku is wrong, on a platform that from the comment's section already has an axe to grind with Kotaku anyway which turns the whole thing into a "he said she said" with no actual evidence for most of the claims.
Rather than take sides I propose the entry be rewritten again. Here's my proposal:
Holding for nomuru2d's comment since I don't know anything about these works/companies.
Did you even read the interview? Kotaku never once did anything correct in terms of journalistic ethics when it comes to anonymous sources.
Besides which, their Dyack article isn't the only instance in which Kotaku has been coming under fire for being the bonafide shameless tabloid of gaming journalism, so I'd think that it's less a "he said she said" and more a "set the record straight because there's no way they will".
I skimmed it, wasn't impressed since they didn't even mention the lawsuit with Epic Games considering how big a deal that was (with the whole "destroy all copies of these games" court order thing). But from the interview (at least the first part you linked, the second part was better but also irrelevant to the issue at hand) I got a strong "pro-Gamer Gate and anti-Kotaku site and interview subject are pro-Gamer Gate and anti-Kotaku."
As for the rest of your argument, it's just an Ad Hominem argument against the platform the opinion's hosted on rather than the opinion itself. Not to mention that the main pushers against Kotaku are Gamer Gate which is not exactly the most unbiased alternative. It also doesn't refute the point that it is still "he said she said"; Dyack was never going to say "yes that article is 100% right, I am a dick", so there is no valid reason to hold is side of the argument up as the truth when both his opinion (because it's about himself and is leadership) and the platform (enjoying a crowd that hates Kotaku) have bias issues.
That's why my revision doesn't take a stance; it says one side supposedly says one thing, the other side refutes it and has a different answer. People can make up their own mind, they don't need someone else to make up their mind for them.
I agree with Shaoken. As it is right now the example needs to reference and link to both interviews. And be as neutral as possible. The wiki is not a place for agenda pushing, regardless of the agendas I agree with.
How about this as a middle ground:
I left out the bit about the crowd funding campaigns because
they were launched under a different company so technically it shouldn't be listed under SK.
That seems better (I'm assuming you or the mods will fix the misspelled links)
Submitted for swaps, all good.
I know the page has been locked and probably won't be reopened again, but Konami really should have gone up on here (not just in light of the Hideo Kojima/P.T./Silent Hills/Metal Gear controversies, but they certainly play a significant role). The steady decline of the company's standing in the 7th and 8th generations has been painful to watch.
A wee bit too little context, I'd say.
Not only that, but merely having P.T. On your PSN library will block your access to PSN entirely, simply because Konami doesn't want anyone to play It anymore.
Err, what? Besides being blatantly wrong by the fact that anyone who has or had P.T can still access the PSN (for example, I have it in my library and I've routinely been able to access the PSN except for when there's downtime), Konami couldn't do that even if they wanted to since it's Sony's network.
they took a big flying leap with their plans to abandon games and focus on Pachinko machines. That and them basically firing Kojima. I think this is particularly damning as it suggests various thing Konami has rights to (like the FOX Engine barring Kojima being savvy enough to keep the rights) will never be used again.
I think with the new Nikkei report on their corporate abuses, and the controversy over their new Silent Hill slot machine and Sex Sells Castlevania pachinko machine, and their seeming permanent departure from console game development they definitely belong here.
Is there any way to bump this for an admin to see this, since out of all the companies, Konami really does deserve it's spot on the list. I'm not even Fan Dumb or Hate Dumb, since I'm genuinely more upset at how they treat their employees like shit, and get away with it, even by Japan's very high-demand standards.
It's probably one of the more unanimously hated companies right now. If someone could draft up an entry maybe we could post this on the general requested edits thread.
"Hated" is not a good qualifier for this trope. See also the Capcom debates on this discussion page for other instances of stuff that does not qualify.
It's a matter of reputation, capcom while getting some heat, still makes notable fighting games. I would wager these moves are completely destroying Konami's rep, possibly qualifying them.
We'd still have to wait to see what happens next. They are supposedly making a new Metal Gear game without Hideo, and they are still turning a healthy profit with their gambling machines. Despite their moves savaging their video game reputation, if they just leave the industry and focus on other things then they aren't really fallen at all.
Nintendo needs to be added. They are without a doubt the fallen creator of the decade.
The Wii U was released to commerical failure which still is plaguing the console, terrible games like Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros. for Wii U which suffered horrible gameplay and millions of glitches that did horribly critically and commerically, horrible buisness decisions that have resulted in them burning their bridges with many other developers, including the ones that work for them, oh, the list goes on. And they're the very defitnition of They Just Didn't Care because them rushing games out the door, let alone their very biggest games of the year, just goes to show that they're not even trying to make quality products any more, they're just desperatley trying to grab money, and failing at that too.
And the seperate people who work for Nintendo could count too. Sakurai is one definite example, after his winning streak came to a crashing stop with Super Smash Bros. for Wii U, as well as publicly insulting his audience.
...Are you for real?
(To Yuki-Akuma) Are you being sarcastic?
They might have had a bit or rough times, but their reputation.
And all that crude jumble of words sounds like more someone upset at how a game didn't hit your exact specifications.
I'm not a Nintendo Fanboy, in any way or form, and I honestly, dislike Nintendo, but holy shit. I think they're doing pretty well, from what I can gather from gaming sites, and friends.
He's just a troll. Ignore him.
Could Matt Groening qualify? He hasn't fallen nearly as far as most of the other entries on here, but he's not the rockstar he was in the late 90s/early 2000s: The Futurama reboot got mixed reviews and wound up cancelled, while the Simpsons has been average at best for the last 10-15 years and isn't really a part of pop culture anymore.
I am not sure about the latter point.
Plus, the reboot of Futurama was actually one of the best reviewed-shows when it was on.
Groening isn't really part of pop culture anymore, just look at how the Simpsons is covered: The show has gone from being out there and prominent to just one of many shows along with South Park and Family Guy, and even major news like the renewal or major Season 26 death doesn't get much coverage, just a couple-paragraph blurb (the same treatment that most shows get).
The futurama reboot wasn't that well-received: Many fans, myself included, thought it was nowhere near as good as the original series on FOX, and there's no denying that it got cancelled due to poor ratings (and Comedy Central isn't exactly overflowing with good series to replace it).
"Many fans" - mind backing that assertion up?
Also, the reception from fans from my POV was more... divisive. (I was talking about critical reception in my last post.)
Critics weren't wild about it: Season 7 and 10 (Broadcast) both scored 76 on Metacritic (8 and 9 don't have enough reviews to generate an average), while 10 has the lowest IMDB average, at 7.4; compare that to 8.2 and 8.1 for seasons 1 and 5, respectively.
Futurama was always kind of a niche show-many of my friends hadn't heard of it, and fewer watched it-so low ratings would track more closely with fans getting bored/turned off than it would for, say, the Simpsons. I'm not saying no-one liked it, I'm saying many of the fans of the old episodes either didn't come back for the reboot, or didn't like what they saw.
"Your friends" is not a big sample size. Also, if they haven't even heard of it I have to question the representativeness as well.
Well, since Disenchantment being \"So okay, its average\", Simpsons now a Franchise Zombie, and Futurama going through seasonal rot during its Comedy Central run, he might qualify.
Could we maybe add Ubisoft to this list? Between Watch Dogs' graphics downgrade controversy & lukewarm reception and Assassin's Creed Unity being almost unplayable at launch, they're not all that popular or credible with many gamers anymore.
The Power Rangers example needs updating. Operation Overdrive is described as one of the three most hated seasons along with Turbo and Wild Force. Super Megaforce needs to be added to that, making it four - the fandom hated the usage of unadapted Super Sentai teams, and the failure to use full team morphs for three of the teams who were adapted.
Might want to ask that here.
Kyo Ani might count though at the moment with Amagi Brillant Park they may be restoring their esteem. (Speaking mainly of the western side of things, no idea about japan)
How did they lose it? Abandoing Full Metal Panic, Endless Eight (though it's said it's more Kadokawa's fault than thiers), and how they caused the moe age with Lucky Star and K-On (not to mention the handling of the series), then they made Free (weapon-grade yaoi fodder)
Only thing hindering Kyo Ani's recovery are signs of corners being cut and rumors of Kyo Ani overriding the original's writer's suggestions.
Just posting it for food for thought.
Update: They might have turned things around with Violet Evergarden, though it won't be complete until they can follow it up with something of similar quality (assuming the new Full metal Panic anime isn't by them)
Could it maybe be added that Bendis seems to be reviving his reputation with his nicely handled All New X-Men run?
Also, Joe Quesada should be added under creators. Decent artist, awful author.
The first thing can't be added - it's classic natter.
The second item even by your own description doesn't fit at all. This page is for creators that lose a lot of appreciation.
Yeah not sure of Quesada had much esteem at all in the industry before BRAND NEW DAY.
Should all creator names in the list be bolded for easier reading?
I don't think that is good style, in my mind. Rewriting the entries to put the names at the start? Maybe.
Should CBCT(Carter Bays & Craig Thomas) be on here? Or is this a Broken Base overracting again? Yes it was only one episode at the very end but the finale to their show seemed to have given them a really bad image amoung the entertainment industry and may have prevented them from making HIMYD.
Admittly I've never watched HIMYM just stumbled upon this ending, but yeah.
First, let's not use acronyms without explaining them. HIMYM is How I Met Your Mother and HIMYD is the spin-off mentioned here. Seems like the quality or reception of the works didn't really play a role (more like Creative Differences), so they should not be cited for this trope.
I mentioned this one the locked pages thread, but that Jeph Loeb example really needs to be cleaned up. The whole thing about Batman:Hush being a failure isn't really true, and the opinion that Hush is a crappy character isn't really the prevailing one. Not only is the book one of the most popular recent Batman stories, but the character, Hush, is extremely popular to the point where people wanted him to be in Nolan's films. There are other problems with this page (and I personally think that it should be purged and that entries should require a Complete Monster sort of process), but that one's the most glaring.
This is a Darth Wiki page, its meant to be full of negativity. No purging and no cleanup efforts.
But there usually should be some basis to the negativity, otherwise anything could be added. There's a reason that there are rules on the Wallbangers and So Bad Its Horrible pages. It should logically be even stricter for a page that's mainly used to bash creators (whether that's the actually what the page is intended for or not). There's even a note at the end saying that entries should only be added if there's clear public backlash, and it's not just based on your own personal opinion. While Jeph Loeb does get a lot of flak, it's not because of this comic. Mentioning that it "flopped horribly" is a bit of a lie, when it's generally well received (and yes there are obviously going to be detractors, but not enough for it to be considered a critical failure). It's also one of the most popular recent Batman stories, which should automatically disqualify it, no matter what the critical response is. It was number 10 on IGN's top Batman stories of all time (and whatever your opinion on IGN is, that still counts for something). The "purge" part is not important, but this entry should definitely be taken off.
Well, you can bring up problematic examples and example writeups here and we'll review them.
Anyhow, Jeph Loeb's wikipedia entry makes his inclusion here questionable. The long list of bullet points looks almost like it's grasping at straws to justify their inclusion. I would remove that entry.
I think some of his works could justify him being there, like Ultimatum, but it would probably need a better write up.
Oh, and the Mark Millar section should probably be cleaned/removed as well. Not only are his works still popular and reasonably well liked (and there are plenty of people who like his comics over the more idealistic Hollywood adaptations), but it also talks about his "ultra-conservative views", when he's known as a liberal.
While I can't comment on the first issue, does the "ultra-conservative views" refer to his own views or those in his works?
It says that the characters in his books support his ultra-conservative views, so it's likely about Mark Millar himself.
Could we add Creator/Pixar to this list? They are the fallen creator of the entire animated film industry at this point.
Aye, zero evidence that they are fallen. So no.
Really? Because Pixar to date as far as I know have never made a bad movie. Even making one bad movie wouldn't be enough for them to be on this page.
I think the OP was refering to some recent pixar movies (Cars2, Brave, and Monsters University) not being as well recieved as the ones that came before them.
And that makes them "the fallen creator of the entire animated film industry"? No...Just No.
Wouldn't count, this is more about general esteem than quality and last I checked Pixar hasn't really lost much of it if at all.
Can DC Simpson still be considered a Fallen Creator? Her newest webcomic, Heavenly Nostrils seems both reasonably popular and devoid of the problems of its predecessors.
Aye, with that entry it seems like we've are dealing with a Temporarily Less Popular Creator.
Now that Edge of Tomorrow crashed and burned, I think a slight revision to Tom Cruise's entry might be in order.
Might want to offer that up here.
Could a note be added to the Gunpei Yokoi part about despite how Nintendo treated him, fans remember him fondly and tend to blame the virutal boy's failure on it getting pushed out too soon?
No, that sounds like it would be Natter of the "contesting edit" variety.
Need to put a bullet before the Tod Browning entry.
Among a few others, whoever did the editing recently did a sloppy job.
Can someone update Richard Garriot's entry? He not just doing Poker games anymore, he is making Shroud of the Avatar, which was funded on Kickstarter, proving that he's not so fallen, after all...
You can ask here. That said, I think it's a bit too early to remove him - we don't know if this work will be a success.
How has the entry on Kevin J. Anderson survived as long as it has? Not only did Kevin J. Anderson NOT write Dark Empire, the comic series predates all of the "good" examples cited. I don't think the entry is salvageable; it should be cut.
The Annie Rice entry talks about her being popular with "the GLBT community and yaoi fans" ...shouldn't the latter be changed to "slash" fans, since it's probably talking about people who write Slash Fic? I know they get confused a lot on the Internet, but yaoi is simply a genre of anime, and the vast majority of fans who like Boy On Boy Is Hot in Western media like Anne Rice are not actually fans of yaoi itself.
to most it's one and the same by now.
Not sure why Molly Ringwald, Robin Williams, Tom Cruise, or Meg Ryan are on this list, but I'm going to request their deletion unless someone can enlighten me.
Tom Cruise has some decent reasons (his whole scienctology thing and related nutty moments) but the others might have had problems but I doubt people think less of them, same with Sean Conery (sure his career might not have been that great but people love him)
Well the trope is basically "they once were great but now they aren't as great." For the Robin Williams entry to use an example whilst he's still good, compared to the 90s he's not as highly thought of anymore. Hell the entry even says his work is still good, it's just that he has a shadow of the popularity he had in his heyday.
Pretty much all of them (which have the reasons why they're on this list in their examples) were big stars during their peek, but have fallen a lot further than just the passage of time would be responsible for.
I thought a key point in this is basically ruining one's reputation in the process, not just falling into obscurity/being a relic of the past.
It's what this trope has been known for, but it's not a strict requirements. And I specified that this was when a star's reputation falls a lot further than what the simple passage of time would be responsible for. To use Robin Williams again, he was insanely popular in the 90s but had a massive drop off over the course of a few years that simply doesn't happen to your normal actor (whose descent in popularity occurs over a much longer time span, except for the rare few whose popularity never really fades and gets looked back on fondly even by people who weren't around for the original run).
Did Gene Roddenberry avert this via Author Existence Failure? I've heard in a couple of places that he became obsessed with Star Trek's "vision" to the point that a lot of the problems in early TNG can be traced back to him, but he died before he could ruin his reputation the way George Lucas has.
I think it helps that back then a lot of what he did wouldn't have been public knowledge, so his reputation remained intact. Had the internet existed during that time he probably would be on this list too but since he was long since dead by the time most of this stuff came up it people's opinions of him have set.
Nearly a year later and they only have 152 Million left in hte bank, can Capcom be on the list now?
No since it's still too early to judge. $150 million isn't a lot of money, but it's not an automatic death sentance. When Capcom can't make a hit game period they'd count, but for they still have an Xbox One launch title coming up (Dead Rising 3) along with a few more games in development, so they haven't hit this stage yet.
Still given the recent string of duds like Lost Planet 3, Remember Me, DMC Devil May Cry, the terrible Megaman Silver Anniversary and the recent Resident Evil. The only thing really left being Monster Hunter and Street Fighter, they really don't got much to go on.
Also, recent news about them being unable to make a next gen fighter shows how far they have fallen
You're forgetting Ace Attorney.
While Capcom's reputation isn't completely ruined, their handling has basically betrayed chunks of their fanbase. That article is a distrubing sign alright considering all things (such the money they're supposedly making from their fighters, how the PS 4/etc doesnt' seem to be that big of a leap,etc)
Once the fighting game market dies down (Again), they'll be in trouble just due to how many other bridges they've burned.
So can we call it that Capcom is now officially done for
Not until it's all said and done. All that article states is that the shareholders removed the complete buyout protection, not that anyone is interested in buying them out. When someone buys a majority of the shares and basically takes the whole company out from under them then it's done, but right now it's just more of what we already knew.
Yes they are in a bad spot, but if Marvel Comics can declare bankruptcy and bounce back then Capcom is not in the grave yet.
...if you want to draft up an example though I wouldn't blame you.
That writeup needs namespace fixing. Also, the "former shell of itself" is hyperbolic - there is nothing to indicate that they are that bad yet.
Instead of blindness to the market maybe have something like suicidal business practices just to stress how many... well stupid decisions they have made.
I would just put that they effectively put themselves up for sale after the 150 million part.
The first sentence screams "this is not an example please delete me." There is no "seems to be headed down this route", you either are or you aren't. And that last sentence is waaaaaaaaaay too long (considering that it's a six line example with only three sentences, the first two not going beyond the start of the second line) and word cruft.
But until such a point as Capcom actually declaring bankruptcy (which I will state again Marvel Comics actually did in the 90s and bounced back from rather well) they can't qualify since the other video game companies either are out of the business entirely or their last few releases have been complete failures in every sense of the word with no shining rays on the horizon.
Forgive me, I was using an older article as a template
Capcom have become another fallen creator of the new tens. First they already had a reputation for Capcom Sequel Stagnation, as evidenced by their Trope Namer status. Then in 2010, Keiji Inafune quit along with other creative minds that made Capcom successful, leading to a mediocre silver anniversary for Megaman, dismal sales of games like Resident Evil 6 and Lost Planet 3 with extremely negative reviews and absolutely horrible sales and the sheer amount of bile and controversy as their blindness to the market by pumping out more DLC rather than new games led to fans growing disillusioned with Capcom and quickly jumping ship as Ono states how they are not capable of developing a next generation Street Fighter game due to dwindling finance. With finances are wasting away with only 150 Million at one point which has caused Capcom to become fallen from the graces of gaming industries where both the press and fans mock them.
Can we swap out the last two lines for Silicon Knights? The current one is;
But in the meantime their two attempts to make a spiritual sequal to ED have failed, and according to former employees who have left the only reason games like Eternal Darkness were so great was because they had Nintendo forcing quality control, and once given free reign the owner was content to screw around on other games, having considered the previous quality control needless interfering on Nintendo's part.
My proposal is to replace the quoted lines with;
This is nothing but a personal political rant. It needs to go:
The Occupy rant has nothing to do with his works, and thus has no place on the page.
Holy Terror, while not well-received by a good deal of the (admittedly biased) comic critics, led comic sales when it was first released, and continues to sell well, indicating that the public may not agree with the critical assessment. It also has several fans in the mainstream comic industry, including Jim Lee, Erik Larsen, Dave Gibbons and Mark Millar, who called it "Genuinely the most fun I've had reading a comic in a decade." Not exactly the credentials of a comic "hated across the board", as its detractors have been claiming.
Oh, and according to said detractors, it's apparently a hate crime to whisper even the faintest criticism of Islam.
Frank's star has only fallen amongst an extremely Vocal Minority. His works (two of which recently got well-received animated adaptations) continue to sell well, and two films based on his works will be released in the coming year. He shows no signs of slowing down.
Uh no, his star has fallen. Note that it's only his pre-Sin City works that are held in high regard. You don't hear people talking about how great The Spirit was, nobdoy is holding The Dark Knight Strikes Back as being anywhere near The Dark Knight Returns in quality, that it's selling is not a indication of it's quality (and it only led Graphic Novel sales, not comic book sales which went to DC), and considering what Miller has said on record in real life about Muslim's it's not a faint criticism of Islam, it's outright racism against them.
The fact that DC refused to publish Holy Terror or allow it to be about Batman as he planned is a pretty good indicator that he's lost a lot of the influence he once had. It also got completely lambasted by critics and the opinion that his work has declined is not a minority one.
the Occupy Rant refers to his reputation as what someone does outside their work can affect their rep as badly (if not more so) than what they do with their work.
That and in many places Frank miller has become a joke, synomous with grimderp and excessive use of prostitutes.
Liz and Dick, and in particular, Lohan's performance in it, was pretty savaged as I recall. I don't think Lindsay Lohan's career is really looking up, now it's mid-2013.
I've moved this section here because, AFAIK, there doesn't seem to be enough "fallen" to these creators to justify their being here, especially with these sketchy writeups. Thoughts?
I agree, and the fact is that the titles are still selling well in both the US and Japan, so it just seems like a few fans complaining.
Plus, this is only Tite Kubo's second work. His first was cancelled so Bleach is his first success, and the Bleach fandom has been volatile in terms of praise and criticism from the very beginning. He doesn't strike me as ever having had the sort of adoration and "untouchability" that's required for a creator to become this trope. He's always had mixed reviews, and Bleach's volume sales are as steady now as they were when it first began.
I'm inclined to agree as they haven't really fallen as A) they never reached godly peaks and B) haven't fallen low.
The Fallen creator point would be when their usual fans feel betrayed by things.
What do you think about Gen Urobuchi? Ever since Psycho Pass season 1, it seems like there have been as many complainers about his supposed dependence on grim plot twists and character deaths as fans. And then Madoka Rebellion...hoo boy. It had its fans for sure, but obviously plenty others felt betrayed. I don't think he's there quite yet, but if we ever decide to unlock this page, I'd like to know what the rest of you think. I certainly think he should write more scripts on his own instead of entrusting the bulk to others (often several different people) as in Suisei No Gargantia and Aldnoah Zero.
Well, if he isn't there yet, we can hold off on adding them.
IIRC, Urobuchi isn't assoicated with Rebellion, though these days I think some things get him on board just to use his name to build up hype (not sure what trope that's called)
Can we remove or edit this bit form the Sean Connery art?
To say he 'had a stellar career through all the '60s, '70s, and '80s' is to paint things a little rosier than they were. While he was in two hit films during the '70s, they were the All-Star Cast Murder on the Orient Express and A Bridge Too Far, he was also in Zardoz and had lots of trouble getting work by the 80s. He was then in the adaptation of The Name Of The Rose for very little money, but it proved to be his comeback. That same year he did Highlander and the next he won his only Academy Award for The Untouchables."
Its pure Natter and violating Repair Dont Respond.
Edit requests for locked pages go here.
I've pulled the entire section for re-evaluation and for the issues originally mentioned:
His career might not be that great, though people still think highly of him for the most part.
The Ken Penders entry under comics needs updating. The line below:
"Even after he left the comic and Archie, he managed to make things worse by trying to sue for the rights to his original characters from the Knuckles series, even though everyone in the comic is owned by Sega."
"Even after he left the comic and Archie, he managed to make things worse by trying to sue for the rights to his original characters from the Knuckles series. This was a ridiculed decision, but when he apparently had a case, resulting in the comic losing a good deal of the characters in the middle of a story line, it really got the fandom going."
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.
Good question though it may be debated as it still has a core fanbase, though one not well thought of by others.
But its course is generally disapointing since its emergence as it seems to get by on disgaea and idea factory colabs (which tend to driven by cameos, fanservice, jokes, and or references not light on much else). And then there's their record with localizations, which ranges from so-so dubbing at least to outright wasting space on the disc at worse.
Some do think it would be better if NIS/NISA teamed up with Atlus and let them do the localizing of things.
Update on the matter: with IF/CH striking out on their own, NIS/NISA are in more of a rough spot with increasing bug problems (including one that induces overheating on the PS 3)
Things are looking a bit rough, but I don't think it's reached the point where their fans feel abandoned.
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.
It is really. I have many complaints about Bendis's work, but I know I'm in a minority.
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)
Also to add salt in the wound
PC Era: Square Enix decides to adopt a bunch of gaming companies, while the PC companies prosper under Square Enix, Front Mission was the ultimate victim. Front Mission as a series was simply marketable on their own but with Evolved it ruined the good name of the Franchise
Also, Wada has recently resigned so it needs to be updated.
To be honest, the Front Mission series was basically finished after 5 (as in that was the planned last chapter/entry), though the fact they mis-marketed the series for the most part doesn't help. Front Mission Evolved was yet another failed attempt at japanese companies to make a grab at the western market.
Wada resigning is good news, now to see if the company picks itself out of the hole it dug. It'll take more than Wada leaving to fix things.
Another big step: getting Nomura away from the writer's desk as sooner or later he'll write Kingdom Hearts into the ground (the fact there's some Kudzu Plot going on right now is not a good sign and with his "fondness of surprises", I don't see things getting better).
It didn't grabbed it correctly. Front Mission Dog Life and Dog Style Manga (published by Young Gan Gan) which is the HBO of manga, had the right kind of mindset. It felt like Band of Brothers but Evolved instead was like Gundam00 with Motomu Toriyama at the helm of Evolve's storywriting. It went as well as everyone expected.
Here's a hint to Square Enix, it doesn't have to be Call Of Duty. It simply has to be like Berserk or Band of Brothers. Nothing like sex, violence and morally questionable protagonists to get the ball rolling.
An update for the Square Enix thing, mainly at the moment their hopes seem to rest upon FFXV for a quick redemption.
Though I would say Toriyama (forgot his first name), the producer of the games with Lightning in them might be a minor one as he seems to be stained the "XIII" name so badly Versus is now being called FFXV
I heard some damning things as of late, such as someone doing a terrible FFX-2 sequel novel and that this person is doing the writing for FFXV. Though hard to say if this is 100% true or not without proof.
An attempted bump, but I should add that the general venom fans have for square is increasing, for among other things finding out how they bungled things like the Front Mission Series in the west (basically they dragged their feet on releasing a two pack of the first two games but then decided to release the third game instead, which was different than most in the series. Then they followed it up with the latest one, which didn't sell well for a mix of reasons, including being compared to 3)
I think it's also worth noting that their Eidos/European division seems to be doing better with Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Tomb Raider and Thief getting good to decent receptions.
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
... honestly, I don't think Stephanie Meyer belongs on this list at all. While I'm not a fan of her work, she's still absurdly successful and not enough time has passed since her (absurdly successful) Twilight Sage. She hasn't even released any works yet, and I don't think that her fandom has lost much faith in her as a whole. She hasn't had a flop, she hasn't really lost prestige (... in so much as she never really had much from most of the people complaining about the book, and her own fandom doesn't really seem to care). Sounds more like it's less Fallen Creator and more that the hatedom felt like it got fuel for the fire.
But yeah the Justifying Edit needs to go at least.
I'd debate Don Bluth being here, alot of people pretty much ignore his stinkers and still hold him highly for his good stuff.
I think the point of his entry is that for all the amazing stuff he did, his stinkers ended up ruining his career.
"Please, only give examples where it's clear that public opinion has pretty much turned against these people and they're not thought of as highly as before."
But it really didn't hurt his reputation any, which is what this trope seems to be about.
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.
For starters, read the trope description. It's not about a company sucking; it's about a company falling permanently.
And how about Dm C failing to meet sales expectations and relying mostly on paid off reviews just to prevent naysayers from being justified.
Capcom doesn't belong on this list. The games you listed? None of them were huge flops, DMC included. They still make solid games, but they also make some bad ones. How's that different from, say, Capcom ten years ago? Or 20? They've always been a hit-or-miss developer (Capcom Sequel Stagnation isn't named after Konami), but this isn't a page just for complaining about a few decisions and games they've made of late. And out of curiosity, do you have an article about them paying off reviews? Because that would be very interesting to me.
This was a good locking.
The thing is Capcom is steadily wrecking its reputation among the gamers that supported it for a long time.
Dm C? Basically a middle finger to the DMC fanbase; those that still support it either are in massive denial or likely a part of the cult of Tatem.
Cancellation of MML 3 and Megaman Universe: Middle Finger to megaman fans and Keiji Inafune who left the company. The first major sign of Capcom going this route.
Selling fighting game revisions as new games? in the age of DLC there's no real excuse for that.
The only fanbase Capcom hasn't lost is the fighting game fanbase and who knows how long that'll last before they too get screwed over. Yeah the broken mess that was Street Fighter X Tekken didn't do much in that area.
As far as the review thing? It's a well known fact that the US gaming media reviews according to the ad money paid to the magazine if not more (Like Activision giving reviewers a nice resort vacation along with freebies that Gamepro editors admitted to taking in the magazine)
So most fans don't trust the reviewers as they will grade anything well if enough money is involved. Considering Activision's massive spoiling of reviewers and their Co D/MW series getting great reviews despite no real changes of note to the gameplay while bashing other games for rehashing...
And for Dm C to get such nice reviews despite being inferior to past games (as could be expected from a developer who is known for making nothing but making alright games)? There's only one natural conclusion to be made here.
Does this proves that Capcom has fallen?
DMC, from what I've seen has been actually well liked by a lot of people who weren't previously DMC fans (and I'm not talking about major reviewers, people like Nerd Cubed and T Otal Bisuit have also given it positive reviews), so your arguments just seems like "I don't like this game, so nobody should"
Can some add another entry to Capcom's fallen creator category with the game being critically panned.
What game? And a game being critically panned doesn't make it this.
Probably talking about Resident Evil 6
Yep, being blasted by critics is another sign of it being a fallen creator.
There's also the case of Capcom's actions as of late.
So what are we waiting for? Add the lacklustre RE 6 reviews to Capcom's entry.
Its locked right now, you'll have to ask a mod such as Willbyr.
How am I supposed to do that? I tried to goign to the forums to get it unlocked but no dice.
PM him if you can.
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.
Ask on the threads linked on Locked Pages.
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.
^You want to add him? From the sound there he isn't an example
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...
You want this thread. Also, can I steal that wonderful/horrible similie for future use?
Thanks. And Share and Enjoy. :)
Sigh... another ME 3 fan-troll causes yet another locked page.
Quick question, will this page ever be unlocked again, like in a few months after the heat dies down?
Hopefully. Probably. That guy struck again earlier today, though, so it won't be for a good while yet.
Damn. Where did he go this time? Mass Effect 3 pages have been locked down almost since the end of the first month, but I think he's been around Darth Wiki before.
Why is this being removed?
Editor was a ban-evading troll. The entry is back now.
Removing this - again:
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.
Well at least they will earn the consolation prize of shame in the ranks of Never Live It Down and Broken Base. I will give them that notorious reputation.
But really I ask, how about the internet backlash? At the very least Bioware has permanently tarnished their reputation.
People have been saying Bioware has "tarnished its reputation" for three games now. I am a user on the BSN, and the vitrol and whining I see from fanboys goes over-the-top (and takes away from the people who are reasonable and willing to explain their position without resorting to hysterics). I've seen people on the forums say they've been "violated", "raped", "lost five years of their life", and call for the firing and/or death of the lead creators.
The only thing I can see that would negatively impact them is their PR policies - they make themselves very open to the fanbase and the media, and when the fanbase gets riled up, they complain that the company hasn't addressed their needs fast enough. Any time someone doesn't "tow the party line", they either get accused of being ignorant or being paid off by EA.
Sure, the ending was bad, but both the reviewers and fans almost universally agreed that the rest of the game was great. Most of the comments on Metacritic voting it down only focus on the ending, to the detriment of the rest of the game. If they have a game that's considered a genuine flop and it happens more than once, I'd have no problem with putting them on here.
The problem is that IGN and Gamespot are loyal Bioware lapdogs. Anything that can be seen as a potential PR disaster would have EA handling the problem by throwing money at the problem. After what happened to Gertsmann, few dared to openly defy other publishers to this day unless it is from Japan which nowadays is seemingly fair game.
If Bioware didn't became a fallen creator. There wouldn't be this desperate sense of controlling the detractors to PR. Which you have referred to and thus is a reason for being seen as fallen creators.
That's a strawman argument. If a company enjoyed the game enough to rate it highly, that means they're automatically on a game publisher's payroll and should be discredited? That's a debate that has no bearing on this example.
You didn't read my statement correctly. When I say "doesn't tow the party line", I mean that if anyone (regardless of whether they're a fan, a reviewer or anyone in between) makes a halfway-positive remark about the game, overzealous fans jump all over them and accuse them of not seeing what they're seeing. The same hardcore fanbase is running around to video reviews, product pages and rating aggregators and downvoting anyone who doesn't agree with them en masse. Even game reviewers who were critical of the game and tried to defend it were set upon by those same fans.
This trope doesn't mean what you think it means. This isn't "So Bad, It's Horrible for creators". It's not "a company makes a mistake that hurts them, even if their products are successful". By that logic, any game publisher who produced a product with a bad scene or a bad ending would be put on this list.
The game is, by all accounts, successful from a critical and commercial standpoint. I don't need to listen to fanboys lecturing others about how the ending was bad - I know that already. It has no bearing on the success of the game. Not only that, but you've written the same example on a couple other pages as well to try and bolster your point.
How about this:
It is proof that Bioware has fallen, that it destroy all of it's goodwill with one single game and it was Dragon Age 2
That is an impossible to read image. If you wanna state your case, state it, because I can't even read that.
That said, explain to me how it destroyed "all of its goodwill" with a game that came out several years ago...and yet Mass Effect 3 was one of the most positively anticipated games of this year?
Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, and The Old Republic have all sold very well (DA2 had a low budget and development time, so it didn't need as much sales to make a profit). I'd say that financial success alone disqualifies Bioware from this.
From the trope description: "Your positive reviews shrink... Your fanbase is fractured and shrinking."
Only qualification that Bioware seems to meet is the fractured fanbase. The Bioware forums' strict policies toward criticism emerged in response to how one of the Dragon Age writers was cyberbullied. It just so happened that the policies went into effect about a week before Mass Effect 3 was released.
@Mr. Death: The image seems to be a bunch of whining about textures as well as showing the contrast between the professional review scores and the user scores on Metacritic. Overall, its not a very compelling argument.
Asaqe, I'll say this once and only once.
Besides the controversy that's erupted over several design and story-based decisions the company has made since being integrated with EA, it's still successful from a critical and commercial standpoint. The hubbub over the ME3 endings, Tali's Photoshopped face, etc. mean nothing. The game sold over 2 million units in the first three weeks. That's the highest-selling entry of the trilogy. Just because a game has a fractured fanbase, doesn't mean it's eligible for this page. It's just fan whining, and it has to be two games or more in succession that flopped (critically/commercially) to even qualify for this.
All you're doing is just arguing in circles.
Bioware isn't this trope. Most of the people who hated the ending on ME 3 do not hate Bioware as a whole. And it can be argued that the backlash is more against EA itself.
If we use Broken Base as an example for this trope then why isn't Blizzard on this page cause almost every single non-critic for World Of Warcraft(and to some extent, Starcraft II) has been leaning towards the negative. And for a non-gaming example, why aren't the creators of Code Geass on this page for breaking their base with R2?
And oh, what's proof that Bioware pays critics to be lapdogs? This need document, primary source.
We need two consecutive flops ordecline in quality. I'll count DA 2 as one since some critics gave it mixed reviews. SWTOR? Most of the hate is based not on it being a game but on it being a "MMO".
It was effectively three hundred million dollars down the drain trying to grab the World Of Warcraft audience and there are several attempts to keep it afloat at all costs.
And think about how they have an IGN journalism be part of their cast to gain the good graces of IGN who will then defend Bioware from any form of criticism and call those who have legitimate concerns about the state of the industry with a plethora of buzzwords.
People are consistently talking about paid reviews since Grand Theft Auto IV and how journalists will not call out a company on it's flaw when they are paid to keep silent.
Also, Tortanic only lasted 4 months before no one cared about it.
So using those examples, can Bioware be on fallen creator yet? Because I am cautious about provoking an Edit War
TORTANIC can arguably be excused since most of the hate I see for this game from a GAMEPLAY VALUE is basic MMO hate, as well as the "kill World Of Warcraft" ambition that kills or ruins MM Os these days trying to cater to the Blizzard crowd just amplicated cause of /v/. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happened when GWII comes out and falls on everybody's face instead of being an epic. This has happened so many times that if one were to add Bioware, we might add almost every single MMO creator that tried to kill World Of Warcraft but failed.
The whole IGN and critic thing is, as far as I'm concerned a "conspiracy theory" where you just pull stuff out and try to link them with no credible source and based on rumors that do not just go to Bioware. Furthermore, most would agree that Mass Effect 3 was a good game until the final 10 mins.
So stop bringing this up again until at least DA 3.............they we can see who's right.
Furthermore it seems that all your "information" is based on what appears on /v/, STA forums and Reddit. There isn't a lot of credibility here. And if we want to add Bioware just cause of "Broken Base" than we might as well add a lot of other companies with broken base issues but critical sucesses here too. It's simply too broad.
But then why is Capcom tossed into the category when Bioware did similar things. An poll that slapped EA with the title of worst company in america which led to a stock dip from the "Fear, Uncertaintly and Doutbt Campaign", angry fandom who formed the Retake Mass Effect protest. That is even more bloody vocal than Capcom's fallen creator status.
Apprently Capcom cancelled two games that fans wanted for unknown reasons, and milked franchises to death. Sonic team's 3D games got just as much backlash from critics as well as fans and ditto for Square Enix(which also ties into the "I'm sick of JRP Gs" mentality that many have).
There I cleared up the most infamous gaming examples. There has to be BOTH massive internet backdraft + critical disappointment from critics for THREE CONCECUTIVE GAMES. And you cannot take "conspiracy theories" into account. All the crediable non-conspiracy arguments show that Bioware is only massive Broken Base atm.
Also it was not Bioware haters that form the Retake ME 3 movement. It was Bioware fans disappointed with the ending. The creator of the club said to refrain from hating and attatcking Bioware and it was more of "I hate EA instead" club. They still have a degree of respect for Bioware. Sure they're gonna boycott Bioware's games, but that's cause it causes EA loss of sales. I asked them what if Bioware broke from EA, and they said that they will go back to supporting Bioware.
Wait until DA 3, and if Bioware gets the same backlash on unofficial reviews(not /v/ hijacked metacritic reviews through) and gets some major critic backlash, then you might be right......might...
Or how about we comprimise and add EA here instead.
That will do perfectly, I can't argue with that.
With the recent Diablo III fiasco, it is perfectly safe to say that you cannot use Metacritic to claim Bioware is this trope. Metacritic ALWAYS gets hijacked by /v/ if thy don't like something. If DA 3 comes out it must meet signficant critical backlash as well as fan backlash, or at least have a ME 3-esque club complaining about the game instead of a couple of fanboys on /v/.
Maybe not, but perhaps the Old Republic MMO may be more convincing argument given the rapid loss of subscribers. At this rate, TOR may as well replace Dragon Age 3 s the sacrificial lamb due to it falling completely below expectations
And Metacritic is valid given how bitter gamers are without the ability to voice their protests. With Journalism serving the company in fear of corporate retribution.
So can you keep dismiss such claims of Bioware haven't fallen yet? It began with Dragon Age 2, continued with The Old Republic and finally Mass Effect 3. It is over, Bioware is completely finished.
The thing is, I don't consider failed World Of Warcraft-killers = Fallen Creator. Otherwise 99% of all gaming companies would be on this page as they have "failed" in a way in killing World Of Warcraft.
And since Bioware is suffering from massive Base Breaker, by your logic then Blizzard would belong here too. Because every single thing said about Blizzard since the recent World Of Warcraft expansions has been total Base Breaker, the fact that they're actually losing players, concerns about the storyline and endless retcons in all their games going on and the possibility that they're appealing solely to people who Play the Game, Skip the Story over their "lore fans", as well as the recent Diablo III fiasco. It's simply too broad.
For things like Sonic Team, Square Enix and Capcom, there is critical review proof that they're Fallen Creator.
And you also have to consider things like Vocal Minority.
And when is "Staff Layoffs" considered Fallen Creator? By this logic 38 studios is also this trope because they went under recently.
Like I said, wait until DA 3,and ME 3 game itself isn't this trope, it's just the ending that caused all of this. 99% of ME 3 players(myself included) believe the game was awesome but the ending sucked. If this continues in DA 3, then you can add it.
And where's the proof that EA is bribing them? I don't like EA which is why I suggested it be in this trope but this whole thing was based solely on that scandal that occurred. Unless you have concrete proof and no assumptions it's a Conspiracy Theory and arguably breaches the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement. Plus by your logic every game should have great critical reviews because they're being paid by the companies!
Also, yes, Colin Moriarty's review was biased, but apparently IGN had other staff members review the game and these feedbacks didn't appear as biased and even pointed out some flaws, however none of them hated the game. There's also the Toonami review that everyone who watched it liked that said the ending was a letdown but the game was good. So the ME 3 game itself is defensible without bribes.
And oh, I don't think this is getting anywhere since we're both arguing in circles, best to wait until DA 3 comes out.
Most of the people in my Warcraft lore forum claimed they liked the game but hated the ending.
On the other hand....if adding an entry for EA isn't enough of a compromise, and adding Bioware is too broad at the moment. A second compromise should be to add Casey Hudson himself as an entry, as he has A LOT of responsibility for the ending assuming the Extended Cut fails to please.
But at the moment, Bioware itself isn't in, because it will be too broad and because of the implications it may have about other gaming companies, such as Blizzard that for some reason, hasn't been on here despite it losing players to other MM Os, had the recent Diablo III fiasco along with all the massive Base Breaker status going on in it's forums, but for some reason, people say Bioware does belong here.
I do not believe that Blizzard is this trope, just believe that calling Bioware this trope will make the definition of this broad.
Furthermore there's a slight difference between Warcraft fans and Warcraft "lore fans".
I am just adding in new data, sorry about that. But yeah, best wait till Dragon Age 3 before people make more accusations.
Some new data:
Looking at regular BSN forum posts on the Extended Cut, I can safely say that there is a good amount of people who feel Bioware has redeemed themselves in a small extent in their eyes, and another equally large number of people that believes that this dosen't solve anything. Still, it seems that everyone is more cautious about buying from Bioware at the moment. But when I look at it reaction of the Extended Cut, it "seems", or at least seems on the forums, to lean towards positive at the moment.
So it seems at the moment the base is slightly less broken. If Bioware pulls something off big for DA 3 it could fix the fanbase and possibly vindicate them.
Looks like the internet has delivered a powerful blow to the stockholders and pretty much the entire entire internet is celebrating at how EA is going to collapse.
Thanks for the new data. While nothing has come out of Bioware recently that may change anything, I hope they take the opportunity to leave EA before the damage is done. They have gained some respect back in my eyes with the way they handled the extended cut, but I'll be wary of what they do since the ME 3 ending.
This has cemented my view of EA as "fallen" even more, say what you want about Bioware, EA is worse and is arguably the propagator of all this! I await the day when EA fully capsizes.....it will be the dawn of a new Renaissance in gaming without a "black hole" to consume all the licenses they find!
Problem is, if EA goes down, it will take all the companies under it with it. You say you celebrate the possibility of EA sinking, but would you be happy if that happened to Bioware? Or DICE? Or Criterion? Or Mythic?
I don't think EA/Bioware would really fit due to their excellent PR control. Sure some will hate their stuff but the masses will still eat it up.
Update: In wake of the Simcity fiasco, not even their PR is saving them from the flak coming their way.
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?
Also Mass Effect will be a financial success but at the cost of alienating even more fans than before.
That's a great way of thinking: everyone who doesn't agree with the way I think is a dumbfuck who can't think for themselves.
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.
This page is about when pretty much everyone agrees that the creator has stopped making any good work and has just started making terrible crap that is universally hated. Bioware hasn't made anything that was critically panned, and the only thing I could find that has a low score by users on Metacritic was Dragon Age II, with The Old Republic having an okay score and the rest having positive scores.
Something Awful always focus on the negative and even if they are focusing all of their hate towards Bioware, they aren't the entire internet or the entire fanbase, and you can't claim that no one likes their work because of the forums of two websites, even if you don't like what they did to their franchises.
Conspiracy theories on Bioware/EA bribing critics and silencing detractors aren't evidence that shows that everyone hates their games either and it wouldn't make them a Fallen Creator either unless they had bribed thousands of players and reviewers into lying about their opinion of the games.
Also the vandalism done to the Old Republic can be a sign of a Fallen Creator. Things normally don't get this bad if you didn't piss off the internet community.
It's kind of hard to take Wikipedia vandalism as a sign of hate from the internet, it could be lots of people vandalizing the page or just a few, as anyone can edit an unprotected article (and its semiprotected now), and people are undoing the damage as quickly as it goes up so people are defending the game. Even if SW:TOR and Dragon Age 2 are hated by the internet that doesn't make Bioware a Fallen Creator because they still have a very large fandom and lots of hype for their next game.
If I could make a comparison to the opening quote, the haters right now are the internet and the lovers are those who rarely care about the deeper parts of the internet and thus more impressionable. I mean Metacritic bombs don't happen unless you piss off the internet community. They may not have fallen sales wise but they are now officially vilified by the gaming community
Trolldoms don't constitute a fallen creator. Bioware has millions of loyal fans.
Only just now has Bioware has visibly started to lose steam with how underwhelming ME:A and Dragon Age 3 turned out. But odds are given all things it'll still be a few more years before they hit this status.
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?
Searching.... Oh, now I see. THAT entry was created by Jamie Gumb, one of the biggest trolls this Wiki has. Just ignore everything he / she writes. Yeah, that troper has caused trouble on the Brightest Day page too. And seems to despise Jaime Reyes with a passion dispite knowing almost dick about him (you can tell that someone was a Ted Kord Fanboy / Fangirl). Not to mention that part of that tirade against Jim Lee (who I personally have mixed feelings about) is that All-Star Batman & Robin isn't finished? Umm... did I fall into an Alternate Universe where it was good? Apparently not since it's listed as part of Frank Miller & his fall from grace.
Smells like a disgruntled scans_daily poster stirring shit up here. Anyway to ban or block him / her?
Lol... I can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm gonna save some of this entry, if only to keep for a record for posterity of this person's utter hatred. I mean, my god! You can literally feel the venom in those words as you read them! If a mod doesn't want this on, send me a note & I'll take it down, or move it to my troper's page. But this tale of a person's (technically two, but I think the two were really the same person using two handles) complete & utter meltdown should be seen for everyone. (Lightysnake included, but I actually think this troper was seriously in the right).
3rd May '11 10:56:49 PM Jamie Gumb
5th May '11 5:20:03 PM Lightysnake
Not even going to comment on most of this, but Brightest Day is not titled so because he's 'mocking' anyone. Oh, and Keith Giffen created Jamie Reyes Never mind the insane Jamie hatred here...
(Deleted entry due to not fitting in with Darth Wiki)
5th May '11 11:12:14 PM Jamie Gumb
5th May '11 11:19:30 PM Jamie Gumb
6th May '11 12:52:14 PM Lightysnake
License To Whine. You don't have it. Johns is still a well regarded and popular writer.
(Deleted entry due to Jamie Gumb's obvious crusade against Johns)
6th May '11 1:51:02 PM Jamie Gumb
Shut the hell up; Blackest Night, Brightest Day, and the Flash relaunch has turned a good chunk of fans against Geoff. Not to mention the John/Kyle fan who hate him for bringing back Hal and hate his gore fetish
Geoff Johns was a Hollywood glorified gopher who hit it big with JSA, Flash, and landed the plum assignment of restoring Hal Jordan as Green Lantern, a move that heralded the book becoming DC's most profitable franchise. But at the same time Johns began to slip. The first crack was Teen Titans, a controversial revamp that saw most of the Young Justice characters imported into the book changed beyond all belief, most notably Kid Flash and Superboy turned into dark and funless parodies of themselves. Then came Infinite Crisis, which saw Geoff Johns and several fellow writers, kill off popular B-List hero Ted Kord in order to replace him with Jaime Reyes, who despite Geoff's constant proclamation, has been box office poison and upstaged by both Aquaman and Booster Gold on "Batman: Brave and the Bold" and "Smallville" (which had a massive case of special effects failure when it came to translating Reyes in live action). This was further compounded by Geoff bitching and moaning about how Ted has to stay dead to "give Jaime a chance to find his audience", while at the same time bullshitting that he won't solve the Broken Base problem of Green Lantern via killing off John Stewart, Kyle Rayner, and Guy Gardner in order to appease people who want Hal Jordan as the one true Green Lantern of Earth. Oh and fucking TEASING fans with constant baiting that Ted is still alive that he has zero intention of following up on, in the exact same fashion Bob Harras teased fans of Spider-Man that Baby May was alive. Infinite Crisis also gave us Superboy Prime, who served as Geoff's soap box to mocking fans who were afraid of change/complaining about the grim and gritty nature of the DC Universe under Dan Di Dio and Geoff Johns. And the gore; besides Superboy Prime maiming and decapitating people left and right, Geoff Johns decided to retool Green Lantern into a gorefest of epic proportions. Not to mention the utter fail of the Barry Allen Flash series, Flashpoint (which has so many lame-spinoffs that it somehow makes House of M look original) and his tone-deafness over the backlash regarding his naming his 2010 Crisis Crossover "Brightest Day", which gave fans hope that we would see a softer, less gory version of the DC Universe coming out of the events of Blackest Night before reality ensued and people found out that it was more of Geoff John's gore fantasies.
6th May '11 2:02:02 PM Jamie Gumb
6th May '11 2:08:57 PM Jamie Gumb
6th May '11 2:46:52 PM Lightysnake
1. You don't speak for everyone. 2. Brightest day was not universally hated. Neither was the Flash reboot, nor Blackest Night by a longshot. Critically or commercially. Hal's revival wasn't universally hated, either. Most of these weren't even largely hated.
(Deleted entry again, due to reasonable reasons listed)
12th May '11 11:34:51 AM Revengers69
Since Lightysnake is going to be a cockblocker and not let Geoff Johns be included because of Butthurt, NO examples should be put here. Make it like Small Name Big Ego, since Lightysnake had to ruin it for everyone.....
(DELETED THE WHOLE FREAKING PAGE)
(Page restored by Old Man Ho Oh)
Edit warring is bad, but that's a bit much, 'specially considering you're not a mod. And both you and Jamie Gumb have hardly been editing cooly. I mean, "cockblocker"? Seriously?
14th May '11 1:58:23 AM Revengers69
14th May '11 8:41:44 PM Lightysnake
If you're going to add someone, please don't make things up. BD was nothing close to a flop. While I would share the criticisms and genuinely disliked the event, it wasn't that panned. Flashpoint hasn't been met with 'aparthy or scorn' by and large either. I don't even like Johns that much these days, but he doesn't belong here yet, unlike Bendis. I made a post on the discussion page. You disagree, then take it there, explain your reasoning and provide evidence
(Entry deleted for the final time in flame war)
I changed the entry on Chris Claremont just slightly because one portion of it, I felt, had Unfortunate Implications.
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.
well some might think that in the case of said females being stronger than they should be (but considering this is the X-men, some female mutants are REALLY powerful), but I don't have much of an idea on this.
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.
They are having some really bad fiscal reports in the last few years, for that matter, though I've been really sheltered from the current crisis.
If fan reaction is anything to go by, the cancellation of Mega Man Legends 3 is only digging themselves deeper. Should I add them in?
EDIT: Never mind, they're already on there.
Yeah. This was something that needed to be acknowledged there, even though my full opinion on Capcom isn't much different.
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.
Yeah. Other M is Love It or Hate It and there isn't enough time to judge.
The guy's pretty much been hated for not being Retro anyway, and having a blogger spreading lies about him means I suspect he will constantly be added to this page.
I seen an article pointing out all the sexist things in Other M... and I can't bring myself to defend it. Honestly I have no idea if all that was intentional on Sakamoto's part, but even then I can't say he's quite a fallen creator as he hasn't exactly reached a terribly high point as he inherited the Metroid series from the Late Gunpei Yukoi. Though if crashing a series' reputation into the ground with a single game counts....
Update: with how good the Metroid 2 remake turned out (and how it basically massively improved from The other M), he's gotten a good distance away from this and if Metroid Prime 4 turns out as good, might be a full 180
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?
Because Fast Eddie deleted it with no discussion. It was agreed after the fact that a Darth Wiki page was an acceptable comprimise.
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
To some selling out or phoning it in can be seen as being a villain to the eyes of fans. Konami being one example.
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.
Personally, I argue that there's enough justification for him to be on the page, largely due to the following passage:
"The true defining trait of the Fallen Creator is the large drop in prestige, even after factoring out the usual Fan Dumb that chases creators wherever they go. It is not necessarily permanent; even if it is, there could still be a partial comeback. Artistic taste can be fickle."
Joss is obviously not Fallen for everyone, but post-Serenity and post-Dollhouse he was Fallen for a *lot* of people. He may recover, he may not, but he's earned his place here for now.
No argument that, as far as some are concerned, Whedon deserves his spot here. However, his recent confirmation as director of the upcoming Avengers movie could be solid evidence that the majority — including the ones who count the most, studios & networks — feel differently. Then again, Jeph Loeb just fell into becoming VP of Marvel's TV division, so being deemed employable is not conclusive across the board.
I agree he belongs here for now - depending on the Avengers film that may or may not change.
Its virtually guaranteed that the Avengers is going to be good especially because his murderous tendencies are tempered by lack of full writing control. That and if Marvel didnt trust him they wouldn't put him in charge of their cash cow franchise.
I suppose I can't argue his place here if there is a sizable portion of his fandom that considers him fallen but I do have to wonder as to why that is the case. He's had a string of great shows that rightfully earned fandoms, including the recent Dr. Horrible, but when one of his shows gets cancelled (in its second season I might add. Even if it was unexpected that it got renewed, that's still more than a whole lot of other shows get) and that makes him fallen? I just don't really follow.
Joss is rather odd in that he's repeatedly created popular shows with strong fandoms, but simultaneously pissed off people from his previous fandom(s) every time. The hatedom is cumulative with Joss, not just garnered off one particular project. And once he's Fallen for someone, I've never known him to claw that person back.
It sounds less like a Fallen Creator and more of a Broken Base.
It seems to me that Whedon does not belong here for the same reason that several others do not belong here. It's a little weird to take somebody who has had several successful franchises, then a single or even a couple of flops, yet continues to get high profile work and call him a "Fallen Creator." Flops are to be expected for anybody who works hard on multiple projects. It's a fact of life. In order to be a fallen creator, the artist should need either a string of flops or a single performance SO BAD that career recovery is impossible. This page is just too harsh in my opinion and it makes the trope basically meaningless. An artist would have to maintain the same level of popularity as just after his first breakout performance in order to AVOID this page. It would be a shorter list to compile the names of people who have never had a single black mark on their resume.
I have to mostly agree.
"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.
I find that hard to believe as well as iD may not be a super popular company, people remember their old works fondly and don't regard it as a massive joke like Daikatana.
Edit: misplaced post
edit: misplaced post. sorry for the inconvenience
I think the entire Marvel Comics company as a whole could be headed for this status, given all the mismanagement and controversy in the past few years, unless something happens in the near future that does a big 180 for the company.
Community Showcase More