There it is: my stuff just isn’t interesting, good, or worthwhile. The system works, and the gates are up specifically to stop stuff like what I create:
I’ve made hundreds of videos, thousands of drawings, 10 or so games, released stuff on iOS, android, pc, mac, Linux, Xbox and I’m just producing garbage.
My attitude is detached from reality in that I think I have talent, but the reality is that all I create is crap.
The other day I was at a birthday party, and everyone was poking at the AI speaker to get it to play birthday music, and it spit out some real trash that no one liked, but we listened to the whole songs. So, I told it to “Play Birthday by the Beatles” And after 2 guitar riffs the birthday boy himself, a 5 year old, turned the music off.
So let me restate my mistake, not that the gatekeepers should be kinder, but rather that my mistake was assuming I have any talent or ability to make good art. That simply by honing my craft for decades I would be able to create something worth getting through the gate. I would be lucky to clean the creatives of the world’s boots, apparently, and I should have taken some opportunities I had to do such things.
Here is “Lost” an image that is not worthy of being seen:
« Last Edit: July 01, 2024, 08:20:36 AM by michaelplzno »
Those are some heavy feelings to deal with, Michael.
Your art doesn’t speak to me. I’m not saying it’s bad, I just don’t see what I like in it. Your rant is really personal though, and I can see myself in that. Some art is popular because people create relationships with the artist (at least in their head). Your frustration is real to me, because I don’t put myself out there, and it feels like your art is often in front, and not you the artist. That is what feels correct to me, but instinctively I know that I get more enamoured with artists where I see them, their real emotions, or see myself in the art.
I remember looking at Phil Fish’s devlog here on tigsource before indie game the movie. I loved the art. It spoke to me. Yet I think a lot more people responded to him and the others in the movie because their frustrations as creators were in front and felt real.
I truly hate having to stink up the world with rants, manifestos, explanations, and pleas for attention. Can’t the art just do the work? My understanding is that the artists who succeed, people just like them as people, even if that is just a crafted image that people think they know the person.
I saw a woman explain that Trump was like her kid, and you can’t stay mad at your kid when they misbehave. The woman was younger than Trump, and explaining that a president should be like a misbehaving child? It’s bonkers, Trump would shoot her dead on the street for more power based on his real personality. But she loves that man like her own flesh and blood. This is how the system should work?
Alas, it’s easier to blame a system than my own limitations. I’m not good socially. I’m not going to go crash some indie elite party and introduce myself and courtesy meekly to get the big boys to like me before they even look at my game. Why experience the art if you don’t like the artist? To look at art is to do someone a favor, not something that enriches the viewer, and I think we’ve made it clear that no one owes anyone that courtesy.
And my art is, by my own measure, antagonistic, I feel defiant when I make it, like I’m not really supposed to be doing the things I do, that I’m deliberately going against the grain of what I’m supposed to make, but I like what I create. Maybe I like the smell of my own farts?
“Welcome to the Beach”
As always, I’m happier to make stuff I’m proud of that gets ignored, than pandering to people who really don’t even know me or care about me. (The gatekeepers) So, I guess that’s the problem right there. Really, I’m posting all these stinky rants because I’m strapped for cash and need to get something out there. And also, farts gotta make it out into the wind, can’t keep them inside too long. lol.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with making art for yourself. Whether it’s therapeutic, or cathartic, or recreational, or educational, there are plenty of good reasons to spend time making what you want to make. And I think it’s great to take pride in that work if you’re proud of it.
That said, I don’t think you can really expect anyone else to be interested in the art you make for yourself. Much less be angry at or resentful of others for failing to connect to your art or to help bring you publicity. It isn’t about being liked, it isn’t about connections, it isn’t about social prowess, it isn’t about being gatekept. It’s that, for the vast majority of us, making art that other people connect with requires a lot of intentional work and study. It requires looking at how others engage with things, trying to communicate with them through art, seeking out criticism and feedback, learning how to incorporate that feedback into the work. If you aren’t interested in making art for others, why should others be interested in your art?
Getting back to my rant on “systems” which ties into the big bitter mistake of my life:
If we want to limit how much stuff makes it to the world, then it would be wise to train artists, one way or another, to be ashamed of the art they make. Thus, to be a “great” artist means always feeling shame that your art is not good enough for public consumption. By doing this, artists are meek, they are desperate for approval, and they are in no way prolific. In fact, if we can make the most sought-after art about suffering, stuff that is painful to make, and so on, we can even more so control the output of creative people. The greatest win for one who wants to control someone’s art is for the artist to die, and thus the entire market no longer has an annoying artist in the way of making money on the property.
Why do you think art schools don’t teach people effective ways to collaborate, and how to lift other creatives up? Why do you think the Oscars always go to supremely depressing movies? (Leo couldn’t get one till he had that miserable bear fight.)
To make art that is fun, the stuff I make, is flying in the face of a system that values pettiness and in-fighting more than just making stuff and having fun doing it. Because if art is fun, or even, easy to make, then we will have a lot of it, and the market for Picaso’s and such will deflate, and the important people will be harder to regulate, and just generally the stuff that gets made will be out of control.
At the risk of defending my ego, I would say the algorithms do single mindedly pick up what people want to see… sort of, but they are only half right, and a large part of what algorithms do is keep the guy who wrote the algorithm in power rather than promote the stuff that people like the most. The truth is that the algorithm perpetuates itself by pushing junk food that never satisfies and keeps people clicking forever.
My defiant art, that was made the wrong way, created out of fun, pride, and a willful individualism to make something that is true to my own sense of “Tegrity,” it may never catch on, but if I go down I go down making what I wanted to create, even if it is stinky, lol
There is absolutely nothing wrong with making art for yourself. Whether it’s therapeutic, or cathartic, or recreational, or educational, there are plenty of good reasons to spend time making what you want to make. And I think it’s great to take pride in that work if you’re proud of it.
That said, I don’t think you can really expect anyone else to be interested in the art you make for yourself. Much less be angry at or resentful of others for failing to connect to your art or to help bring you publicity. It isn’t about being liked, it isn’t about connections, it isn’t about social prowess, it isn’t about being gatekept. It’s that, for the vast majority of us, making art that other people connect with requires a lot of intentional work and study. It requires looking at how others engage with things, trying to communicate with them through art, seeking out criticism and feedback, learning how to incorporate that feedback into the work. If you aren’t interested in making art for others, why should others be interested in your art?
I’m not against the requirement you lay out here to reach people. What I’m against is the idea that I can’t be me and make art that hits. Because if I run my soul through an algorithm of feedback, criticism, and intentional communication to the point that I’ve thrown out what it means to be me, why do *I* need to create art at all? It’s all mechanical and I’m not even making stuff that I care about anymore. It’s designed entirely for the audience and not reflecting who I am. If I’m just going to turn into a machine that submits to a system that just wants to grind me into paste, why not just get a job filling out spreadsheets at some tech giant company and be done with it? You don’t need me to make art that doesn’t express who I am and is designed so carefully and intentionally for other people that my own sense of self is gone.
Because if I run my soul through an algorithm of feedback, criticism, and intentional communication to the point that I’ve thrown out what it means to be me, why do *I* need to create art at all? It’s all mechanical and I’m not even making stuff that I care about anymore. It’s designed entirely for the audience and not reflecting who I am. If I’m just going to turn into a machine that submits to a system that just wants to grind me into paste, why not just get a job filling out spreadsheets at some tech giant company and be done with it? You don’t need me to make art that doesn’t express who I am and is designed so carefully and intentionally for other people that my own sense of self is gone.
Nobody said anything about “designing entirely for the audience”! It doesn’t need to be this all-or-nothing. Many people successfully make work that honors their own desires for making art, and does so in a way that others find interesting and compelling. If one did feel like it was out-and-out impossible to make work that was both personally satisfying and interesting to others, I think it’d be totally reasonable to choose to satisfy yourself in your work—but then, again, you can’t really be surprised when no one else cares about the product.
You’re right, Michael. The problem isn’t that your work is boring. It’s that you’re the only person on the planet interested in the truth, and everyone else is too stupid and simple to meet you on your level.
And my art is, by my own measure, antagonistic, I feel defiant when I make it, like I’m not really supposed to be doing the things I do, that I’m deliberately going against the grain of what I’m supposed to make, but I like what I create. Maybe I like the smell of my own farts?
I played your Egg Game and I am struggling very hard to figure out what grain you’re going against. It’d fit perfectly well amongst the top mobile games if only you made 3000 levels and added five different currencies that take as long to count up after you win as the entire level took to play.
I guess there is something defiant about making art that doesn’t seem edgy or defiant at all I guess, being edgy as an indie is pretty mainstream.
Oh, you like video meme based arguments so I’ve got a relevant one for you:
Do you like other peoples’ games because they have lots of self-expression in them? I guess sometimes I like it when a game has a story told from the heart, but I’m pretty sure some of the time the thing that makes the storytelling good comes from the other people on the team who are just good at the craft.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2024, 12:52:51 PM by Foxwarrior »
Boring… I’m not so offended by that one though it is a death sentence I understand. It is a legitimate point about my art. But if people were simple and stupid then boring work would be perfect for them, no? So, it really can’t be both that my art is boring *and* that people are too dumb to get it.
So, I *do* get it, now: my art is not ambitious enough to get people excited about it. I can at least work with that. Just expressing my soul is not enough for today’s demanding and discerning audiences. I generally think I’m over the top with ambition, but maybe I need to go bigger. At least I understand where I can take that.
Though, I always worry about going off the rails.
This one was done while my regular meds were surreptitiously replaced with Viagra.
And my art is, by my own measure, antagonistic, I feel defiant when I make it, like I’m not really supposed to be doing the things I do, that I’m deliberately going against the grain of what I’m supposed to make, but I like what I create. Maybe I like the smell of my own farts?
I played your Egg Game and I am struggling very hard to figure out what grain you’re going against. It’d fit perfectly well amongst the top mobile games if only you made 3000 levels and added five different currencies that take as long to count up after you win as the entire level took to play.
I guess there is something defiant about making art that doesn’t seem edgy or defiant at all I guess, being edgy as an indie is pretty mainstream.
Oh, you like video meme based arguments so I’ve got a relevant one for you:
Do you like other peoples’ games because they have lots of self-expression in them? I guess sometimes I like it when a game has a story told from the heart, but I’m pretty sure some of the time the thing that makes the storytelling good comes from the other people on the team who are just good at the craft.
This post cheered me up bigly. I’ll try to think about it more. Thanks.
Do you like other peoples’ games because they have lots of self-expression in them? I guess sometimes I like it when a game has a story told from the heart, but I’m pretty sure some of the time the thing that makes the storytelling good comes from the other people on the team who are just good at the craft.
I think this is a very salient point and one that’s perennially relevant in these sorts of conversations. Self-expression can absolutely have value if the person expressing themself finds some relief or comfort in doing so. But, as you indicate, I don’t think it’s particularly meaningful on its own. A lot of great art has not been whatsoever self-expressive, and self-expression has no intrinsic value to an audience that otherwise takes nothing away from a piece of art.
I’ve made a range of games from more self-expressive stuff to more crafted meticulously designed pieces. I’ve even started working on a “BoobieVania” a roguelike designed for teens who like looking at boobs that grow and grow. As we’ve discussed, EggFun.io is just as much a mobile smash as any of the rest, at least by design. And Strategery 2012 seems to have totally warped the United States, to the point that I wish it had less of an impact. The big problem with Strategery was that it was too successful.
And yes, as much as I do think powerful people owe the world a lot, and we owe each other at least a bit more than nothing, I don’t think the big stars of the world need to retweet the little guys, clutter their feeds with the common riffraff, or that I even count as a little guy at this point. Though it was a mistake on my part to think that the tip of the indie pyramid would be kind, or that breaking through would simply require hard work and guts.
So, my true mistake, if I can sum it up, is probably as simple as pride. A lot of people, in my view, are idiots. Even sainted elites who can do no wrong sometimes seem like phonies to me. A lot of games that are popular don’t seem so special to me. A lot of so-called great art seems more like it is great at the political game than of merit. And that’s all me being proud, ego. “Just because some experts say this is great art doesn’t make it so,” I state with pride because of course I have a keener eye than those stuffed suits at the top. And a million people seems like a lot, but a million people can be wrong. But to accuse millions of people of being wrong requires a lot of pride.
With BoobieVania, the artist I’m collaborating with gave me two pieces of art, one of a more adult protagonist, and one that looks more like the current style for anime girls designed for kids. Now I must choose: am I to make a game that would be appealing to me, where the protagonist is the age of a kid’s mom. Or some kid protagonist that is the age of the audience. The true answer of a craftsman would be to incorporate several styles of sexy characters so that the audience can lust after their own personal favorite. But that’s pride that’s making that decision, by saying I can beat this binary with the hard work and guts it seems that only alienates everyone else. I’m not “taking my medicine,” “learning my lesson,” I’ve produced, quite proudly, a third option that goes around this elaborate construction designed to humble me.
Thus, I would also say my greatest asset is pride, so it gets complicated that it is both a strength and a mistake. It’s a dual edged sword and one that can be quite tough to wield. It’ll cut your own head off in an instant but also it will just destroy phonies who aren’t smart enough to examine anything beneath the surface. To let it go, and truly become a man of the land, humble and mild is something that would be dangerous when so many people are nefarious, negligent, or both.
I don’t know what the answer is, really, I can sit here in the ice of hell flapping my wings and freezing the ice more, but the answer can’t be to cut my majestic wings off just because that’s the punishment I’m supposed to get, right?
