Penny Arcade Makes Time 100

Precision noticed that Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins of Penny Arcade fame have made the Time 100. The writeup talks about Child's Play and PAX and lavishes deserved adoration upon the pair. I've always envied their ability to maintain control over their brand and use it for appropriately portioned good and evil ;)

Comments

Good for them

[Wyatt Earp]

I'm a big fan of the brand and PAX, but I really have a hard time finding anything enjoyable about their writing.

Perhaps 1 out of 10 comics are interesting and most often the writing drones on like I'm reading Moby Dick

"I scrolled up and down my Steam library yesterday, listlessly, without so much as a remembered thrill; all I wanted to do was play Blur for some reason, something I hadn't picked up in weeks but whose thirsting fronds were reaching up through some mental fissure. After a few rounds to loosen up, quite organically I found myself in a Party discussing the events of the day. The conviviality and natural flow of the conversation began to disintegrate as the race progressed, slowing and then ceasing altogether, like the dwindling reports from a bag of microwave popcorn."

Re:Good for them

[iknowcss]

"Tycho's" literary voice is one of my favorites. It flows well and sounds more like ironic Moby Dick than Moby Dick.

Re:Good for them

[Enderandrew]

The comics are often low-brow humor. The posts are often very high-brow diatribes. I love both and the contrast they portray. But to each their own.

Re:Good for them

[Rogerborg]

NOTE: your post got cut off before you showed us how it should be done. Please repost, kthnx.

Re:Good for them

[Winckle]

You don't need to be a writer to criticise a writer.

Re:Good for them

[spun]

Both men are trying to improve their art. Gabe has come a long way from his humble beginnings. Tycho's writing outside the comics is still an acquired taste. I think it is partly an affectation, he's the smart one, Gabe is the dumb one, but those are still personae they put on for the comic.

Re:Good for them

[spire3661]

IM sorry you cant appreciate PA writing. It is very wordy and convoluted sometimes, but thats part of the appeal. He doesnt dumb it down for the masses. Most of the time when im reading i can speed skim through articles, but when i read PA i stop and really process what is being said.

Re:Good for them

[Anonymous Coward]

They answered you years ago.

Re:Good for them

[wetdogjp]

I agree. I remember actually crying when I read the story he wrote for his newborn son.

Every time a read a thoughtful, poetic post from him, I think, "That's how I want to write."

Re:Good for them

[SEWilco]

Hey, this is a big f***ing deal.

Re:Good for them

[donscarletti]

"slowing and then ceasing altogether, like the dwindling reports from a bag of microwave popcorn."

Any idiot can write a meandering tangle of pretentious and meaningless wank about a game that I will never care about, but only Jerry Holkins can finish it a simile so clever that I will be actually glad I read that drivel. That's why he's the one with a web comic and we're all posting on slashdot.

Re:Good for them

[Anonymous Coward]

I think some of the complaints people have about how the writing in PA has gone down hill is because we aren't 16 anymore. Its easy to see to be drawn into tech writing when the next shader release is the biggest thing going on in your life.

I'm still relatively young, but PA no longer has the immediacy it once had. Your mileage may vary, but that's why I don't read all of tycho's rants anymore.

Oh, and those people denigrating Child's Play need to die in a fire.

Re:Good for them

[retchdog]

Wordy and convoluted isn't enough to be "smart".

Their stuff reads like the slightly-less-funny nerd version of Dave Barry. Which is fine; I like Dave Barry at times, but the subgroup they're targeting isn't geniuses.

Re:Good for them

[billcopc]

I knew this would be one of the complaints, but upon thinking it through I realized I actually enjoy the writing, and the fact that it comes in tiny little morsels. The heavy masturbatory prose of most navel-gazing writers, I can't stand, but PA is just a tiny bit of flourish to liven up what would otherwise be "This game rocks, sucks, and/or eats babies. I (dis)liked it because of X, Y and that native-american allegory tomato."

There are only so many ways to criticize the game industry and its excrement. Clever wording makes it a lot less boring.

Re:Good for them

[Rogerborg]

For sure, any monkey can fling poop.

Re:Good for them

[GameMaster]

Ah, but which Moby dick are you referring to? The original, or this one

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/1/15/

Re:Good for them

[Anonymous Coward]

But Moby Dick is really, really good.

Spending most of a page on one sentence about one topic gets across the obsession the novel is about AND as a free bonus tells you a lot about both whaling and the culture in which it was written.

Moby Dick isn't something I'd pack to read again on a vacation, but it was well worth the time taken to read it.

Re:Good for them

[Anonymous Coward]

That paragraph is made of awesome. The "Tycho" method of aggressively subtle literary exposition, delving in to a coal mine in search of nerdcentric esoterica, is what makes PA so fun for me.

As they should!

[Pojut]

They are arguably among the most influential people in an industry bigger than Hollywood...I'd say they deserve a place on the list.

Not bad for two nerdy dweebs who probably got swirlied in middle school.

Re:As they should!

[Enderandrew]

Didn't Halo 3's launch weekend generate more revenue than the biggest Hollywood opening weekend of all time?

Video Games are just as influential and big as the movie indudstry.

Re:As they should!

[Saishuuheiki]

I think that's a false comparison. Theatres are limited it the number of people that can fit in at any time, however games can manufacture the cd's ahead of time so they don't have an upper limit in the same amount of time.

Re:As they should!

[Monkeedude1212]

Halo 3 did make more than most hollywood movies in its first day than they do in their first weekend. Over the course of a few months though I believe most movies catch up.

While I would agree that video games are a big industry, I wouldn't go as far as to say they are as influential as movies. Video games (especially new releases) usually cost about 5 or 6 times as much as a movie ticket. If you consider the amount of sales and not the dollars earned as influential (which I have come to take its meaning), than movies still win out.

Re:As they should!

[spun]

Well it may be a false comparison, but the video game industry is now larger than the film industry in terms of revenue. The film industry made around 10.5 billion in revenues in 2008, while the video game industry made around 11.5 billion. This is counting movie and game sales and rentals. The film industry may hold more cultural cachet and influence, and more people consider films to be true art, but that is changing as well.

Re:As they should!

[Enderandrew]

A video game costs $60. Avatar tickets cost me $15 a pop. Even assuming a standar movie ticket is only $10, a video game is more expensive. So for the same money, more people are seeing movies. I'll give you that. But if I buy one copy of Mario Party and invite my friends over to play, then multiple people are playing on the one purchase.

But you often watch a 2 hour movie onec, and you're done. Video games you spend more time with. Video games are often played multi-player, or online. You aren't supposed to talk during movies, so one could argue that video games are a more social experience.

For the dollars, I'd contend that video games consume more of our time and conscience. Furthermore, I think they have subsumed a larger piece of the cultural zeitgeist. My daughter is 4 and doesn't own a video game console yet, but she knows who Mario is.

Re:As they should!

[Dancindan84]

Video games (especially new releases) usually cost about 5 or 6 times as much as a movie ticket.

And about 1/2 the price of a small bag of popcorn and soda.

Re:As they should!

[jaymz666]

How did Halo 3 sell the next weekend, and the next, and the next? How were the DVD sales? How about the TV rights?

Re:As they should!

[jaymz666]

Box office revenues I could find for 2008 say they were about 10 billion, the home video revenues were around 22 billion. That was after a 5% decline.

Re:As they should!

[Hurricane78]

Does your definition of “the world” only include “Geeks, mostly only from the US” again?

I don’t think in all of Europe more than a few geeks have ever heard of Penny Arcade. I used to create web pages that were (willfully) read by 13 million people every day. So am I now also influencing the world? (Hint: No.) ^^

Re:As they should!

[Wyatt Earp]

No, the video game industry is not bigger than the film industry.

Film Industry in the US employs 361,000

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs038.htm

All software publishing in the US employs 263,700

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs051.htm

Globally video games are worth 40 billion

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/VideoGameSalesOvertakingMusic.aspx

US film revenue is 42 billion, total box office gross is 10-11 billion, but that's only a piece of the US film industry.

http://www.allbusiness.com/media-telecommunications/movies-sound-recording/10512814-1.html

Re:As they should!

[spun]

Okay, you've got better sources so I must admit to being mistaken. Still, it's clear which way the trend is going, film keeps losing entertainment market share while video games keep gaining. It may yet be a while before games are accepted as real art, look how long it took for comic books.

Re:As they should!

[Wyatt Earp]

Yea, I bet by 2015 they'll have parity in the US, or near parity, unless ticket prices keep going up.

Of course when the next gen systems come out (replacement for PS3 and 360) game prices will probably hit 80 dollars a game too.

Re:As they should!

[spun]

More interesting to me is the question of when the game industry will achieve cultural parity with the film industry. While I've seen a few of video games that I consider great art, but these are never the popular ones. Movies speak to whole cultures, video games speak only to a smaller subset. When will we see a video game with the cultural impact of, say, Star Wars?

Re:As they should!

[blankinthefill]

"Recentering globalization: Popular culture and Japanese transnationalism" is a study by Koichi Iwabuchi published by Duke University Press that was done in the 90's and shows that the character Mario is more recognizable to American youth than Micky Mouse. If there's better support for your contention, I think you'd be hard pressed to find it :)

Re:As they should!

[Wyatt Earp]

Mario as a brand is the closest we've come.

WoW and Starcraft are getting there, you see more and more actors and athletes saying they play WoW as a pastime. One of the top NFL draft picks listed WoW as his hobby outside the game.

I don't know when a game will strike Humanity the same way Star Wars or Star Trek did. It might take a while, after all cinema from the advent of the art took, what 40-50 years to really go international and the first things that did were Disney animated films. So maybe Mario is the Disney of video games.

Re:As they should!

[Gamer_2k4]

I'd say they deserve a place on the list.

Perhaps...but any entry on a list that puts Lady Gaga as the top artist of the year should be taken with a grain of salt.

Re:As they should!

[SuiteSisterMary]

Not bad at all, Halo Legends is, in fact, out on DVD and Blu Ray, and wait for it. The book sales are all good, too.

Re:As they should!

[jaymz666]

Halo Legends is not Halo 3, it's a different thing. That's like adding sales of The Black Freighter DVD onto the Watchmen Boxoffice sales report.

Re:As they should!

[h4rr4r]

You don't have a charity that takes in a million dollars either. Don't be jealous. In European nations were most of the kids speak English PA has an audience. In Eastern Europe probably not so much. For my purposes Eastern Europe begins were the wall was.

Re:As they should!

[BoberFett]

That's because we still have entire generations alive who do not play video games. People who are currently in their 30s grew up playing video games. When those people are the oldest generation, we'll see a massive shift in acceptance of video games as culturally significant.

Re:As they should!

[SuiteSisterMary]

Well, wouldn't you? It gets awfully metaphysical. I've got the Ultimate Watchment blu-ray thingy, which includes TotBF. I don't know that they're splitting up that price.

Besides, isn't merch and spinoffs usually counted in with the rest of the franchise?

Re:As they should!

[Jedi Alec]

You're kidding right? For one thing...we read Slashdot, or used to at one point. Slashdot has a thing called "the funnies" which links to PA.

Trust me, we know PA and love it :-)

Re:As they should!

[jaymz666]

You're confusing the entire franchise with the individual releases.

Re:As they should!

[osu-neko]

I don’t think in all of Europe more than a few geeks have ever heard of Penny Arcade.

Presumably this is based on your personal experience, combined with the certain knowledge that Europe is such a small and homogeneous place that your personal experience is sufficient to broadly generalize over its entirety.

In any case, you're wrong.

Well congratulations

[0racle]

Honestly, congratulations. It's nice when good work gets recognized.

I love the picture

[Sebilrazen]

And the fact that "Fruit Fucker" is in it with them.

Re:I love the picture

[Anonymous Coward]

And that Jerry is hiding.

Popularity contest

[Enderandrew]

Kudos to them, but sadly this was a popularity contest where the likes of Justin Bieber and such were receiving votes.

I'd rather a wide-range, rational panel try to offer their opinions rather than open up a massive internet vote.

Re:Popularity contest

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it would be much better to only have a few select people make the decisions instead of opening it to a public vote. Wonderful idea.

Re:Popularity contest

[causality]

Yes, it would be much better to only have a few select people make the decisions instead of opening it to a public vote. Wonderful idea.

That depends on who those few select people are. Specifically, do they make a decision "just because", or at every step of every decision can they give you good solid reasons to justify why they made that choice?

Re:Popularity contest

[bertoelcon]

Don't forget this is a contest moot from 4chan has won before. It makes the whole contest seem moot. (Partly intended pun there)

Re:Popularity contest

[Randle_Revar]

Anyone know if they fixed the massive flaws from last year that allowed 4chan to precisely control the top 21 entries to spell "marblecake also the game"?

Re:Popularity contest

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, marble cake is delicious.

Re:Popularity contest

[Richy_T]

Battenburg!

Re:Popularity contest

[fishexe]

I'd rather a wide-range, rational panel try to offer their opinions rather than open up a massive internet vote.

What the hell does rationality have to do with opinions on pop culture?

Re:Popularity contest

[bertoelcon]

I thought they fixed most of them mid-contest and at the end it was just people manually fixing the votes by voting often.

Really, Time?

[moosesocks]

I was impressed until I read the rest of the list, particularly this love letter to Glenn Beck........ written by none other than Sarah Palin herself.

Really, Time? Sure, he's pretty influential, and a demagogue to be certain. But casting him as an intellectual and a history buff? Have they ever even watched his program?

Jon Stewart had a great point last week: The Daily Show is as absurd and farcical as it's been since Day 1. However, the "real news" media are slowly inching their way toward the realm of absurdist comedy and entertainment.

Re:Really, Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of Jon Stewart... how do they have Glen Beck and Sarah Palin on this list, but not Jon Stewart?

Re:Really, Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always been under the impression that The Day Today and Brasseye actually dragged the real news media closer to parody rather than acting as a warning.

Re:Really, Time?

[Karrde45]

But casting him as an intellectual and a history buff? Have they ever even watched his program?

I wouldn't jump to conclusions about Beck as a person just based on how he acts on his program. It's fairly plausible that he hams it up a bit to play the 'everyman who loves his country' role that he's carved out. I haven't watched his program, but from what I hear it's a bit more over the top in comparison to his show back on CNN. He could very well be an intellectual and history buff, who happens to become an emotional demagogue once he's in front of the camera. Stewart and Colbert (as you noted) aren't the only ones playing up the entertainment angle.

Re:Really, Time?

[sexconker]

Speaking of Jon Stewart... how do they have Glen Beck and Sarah Palin on this list, but not Jon Stewart?

Jon Stewart is only popular amongst high, college-aged kids who don't even realize that there were other hosts of The Daily Show before him. And he was eclipsed in popularity by Steven Colbert long ago.

The gp said that Jon Stewart claimed "The Daily Show is as absurd and farcical as it's been since Day 1.".

This is bullshit. The Daily Show has tried to get taken more seriously in recent years. They need to have some "serious time" once in a while (typically when Stewart goes off on a rant, or has a serious guest) in order to differentiate The Daily Show from The Colbert Report.

Jon Stewart is being pushed out of his comfort zone and people are making him out to be an intellectual when he isn't. The irony is that Colbert has more of that background than Stewart, yet Colbert insists on parodying the right so hard that he's merely a self-parody of the left's "educated" and "tolerant" views of "lol the right is retarded lol lol".

Re:Really, Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wanted to mention that I completely agree with you on this. I immediately noticed glen beck as well, and thought time did a great job of ignoring the fact that he refuses to answer the question of whether or not he raped and murdered a young girl in 1990?

Joking aside, I thought that time would at least touch on the fact that he's controversial. But then I was not smart enough to notice who it was written by...

this article was so much of a love letter, it could be read during nailin' palin 2 as the background music.

posting as AC to save my karma.

Re:Really, Time?

[Happy Nuclear Death]

We get it. You don't agree with Beck's opinions, so he shouldn't be on the list, even though you admit he is influential. This is what passes for "Insightful" here?

Re:Really, Time?

[vxice]

Stewart pointed out that his networks slogan isn't "fair and balanced."

Re:Really, Time?

[moosesocks]

But casting him as an intellectual and a history buff? Have they ever even watched his program?

He could very well be an intellectual and history buff, who happens to become an emotional demagogue once he's in front of the camera.

In that case, he's a pathological liar.

Re:Really, Time?

[Spad]

I suspect a lot of top media execs were sitting around thinking "This is an amazing, edgy, hip current affairs show - we need to be more like that"

Re:Really, Time?

[h4rr4r]

I think he was more complaining about claims that the man was an intellectual. I think we can all agree that is one thing he is not.

Re:Really, Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if accused rapists and accused murderers are influential, that doesn't mean Time shouldn't have the good taste to remove them from their list.

Or maybe they'll include Osama Bin Laden just because some of his nutjob followers flood the poll, and then they can include a love letter from a suicide bomber on how he is such a great intellectual and history buff.

Re:Really, Time?

[brkello]

Just because you say things, doesn't make it true. Pretty much everyone I know like Stewart and they are all well educated, non-drug using people. My PhD physicist dad likes him. So no, your first theory is a way the right try to dismiss his popularity, but it isn't true.

The Daily Show has always been about making fun of the news. It does it well. People are taking it more seriously because they realize he asks better questions than the "real" news stations. He points out the stupid things people do and gives a more accurate portrayal of what is really happening all while being funny. Does he make more fun of the right than the left? Heck yes. But the right is much easier to make fun of because they love really dumb people. Example: Palin.

Colbert is also quite amusing. He plays the part so well there are many conservatives that watch him and agree with him and don't have the slightest clue that he is making fun of them.

I imagine it is offensive to people who have been brain washed that one way is the right way. But for those of us who enjoy seeing hypocrites and liars being called out, it's good fun.

Re:Really, Time?

[brkello]

Yeah, but who would actually know that? Usually, if you have a "show", when you are interviewed off that show, you show who you really are. If he is acting, he is doing it 24/7. Maybe he knows a lot about history...but his grasp of what history means and how it applies today would get an F- by any reasonable historian.

Re:Really, Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

That was actually one of the things that gave me a little more respect for them. Rather than having journalists and editors at Time write the bios they got them from people with similar mindsets. There aren't a lot of journalists that would have something good to say about Glenn Beck, so they went to Sarah Palin. It's no worse than getting a bio for Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva from Michael Moore.

Childs Play

[Itninja]

I like to read PA from time to time. I could do without the sophomoric language that seems to be thrown in simply to 'identify with the youth', but sometimes I really find the comic funny. But the Child Play charity is primarily just a tax shelter for PA. They make a lot on money on advertising and PAX, and use CP to avoid (or at least defer) paying taxes on it. Not that that's anything unusual for a corporation, but I hate when companies portray their 'charitable giving' as some grand altruistic philanthropy, when it's just a way for them to dodge taxes.

If the laws that allowed this type of behavior went away, so would the giving.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait what, I don't even

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

If you can show proof, great, but I sincerely doubt this.

Re:Childs Play

[Chris Burke]

You can only write off what you actually donate. So unless they're donating enough to make their net income zero, they're paying taxes on their advertising income.

The vast majority of money for Child's Play comes from donations, donations that go completely into the charity, and are completely unnecessary for your It's Just A Tax Shelter theory.

They've raised literally millions of dollars for sick kids to have games to play in the hospital.

You're full of shit and an asshole to boot for trying to tear down something as great as Child's Play.

Re:Childs Play

[zero_out]

I have similar issues with PA. I used to read it, and thought it was quite humorous, but with the language and dialogue, it was like drinking your favorite soda (Mountain Dew) with a bit of raw sewage in it. After a while, I just couldn't do it anymore.

However, I must give them praise for standing up to Whacko Jacko Thompson. That guy really needed to be put in a box for his own good. Thank you, PA, for taking him on, and being a major factor (IMO) in shutting him up.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Psychopath]

I like to read PA from time to time. I could do without the sophomoric language that seems to be thrown in simply to 'identify with the youth', but sometimes I really find the comic funny. But the Child Play charity is primarily just a tax shelter for PA. They make a lot on money on advertising and PAX, and use CP to avoid (or at least defer) paying taxes on it. Not that that's anything unusual for a corporation, but I hate when companies portray their 'charitable giving' as some grand altruistic philanthropy, when it's just a way for them to dodge taxes.

If the laws that allowed this type of behavior went away, so would the giving.

You do not understand tax laws as well as you think you do if you believe the primary motivation for charitable contributions is to dodge taxes. It's a secondary motivation. You don't come out ahead.

Re:Childs Play

[enderjsv]

I'm pretty sure they receive no tax breaks from Child's Play except perhaps what goes into the cost of advertising and running the event, which may reach into the thousands but not into the millions that the charity raises. Child's Play is a charity auction, which means the money and items donated are tax write-offs for those who are donating, not for Gabe and Tycho.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

Wow. It's hard to find the words. Yeah, there are reasons to be cynical about corporate charities, like how tobacco company Philip Morris spent tons more on advertising about how charitable it was than on actual charity...

But dude, you can't let that cynicism blind you to real charity. I don't think you have any idea how hard volunteers for Child's Play work every year. In the first year before they had any real logistics in place, a whole team of local volunteers worked night and day to physically process, store, load, move, and unload tons of toys for Seattle Children's Hospital. Even though now the toys go to hospitals directly, volunteers still help with the charity dinner, with various fund raising events around the country, with community efforts at PAX like the Cookie Brigade, etc.

Unless you have more evidence than a mere assumption, it is callous and insulting to all those volunteers to paint their hard work as nothing more than a 'tax dodge'. While I don't work for PA Inc, I know a lot of people who do, and I have heard nothing, not even a rumor, of any funds from PA revenues being somehow 'laundered' through CPC.

Re:Childs Play

[shadowrat]

If the laws that allowed this type of behavior went away, so would the giving.

Yeah! It sucks that people get rewarded for helping people. If there were any justice in this world, we would severely punish charities. Only then could we be sure that the people were truly selfless.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

OH NOES! TEH SWEARS!

I have never, and will never, understand this mindset. They're just words. Words are giving power and meaning only by the reader. To me, they're not a big deal, if anything they indicate that the authors are being honest and not filtering themselves just to fit in some moralist 'acceptable' box.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

You can also write off the income of anyone designated at 'administrators' of the charitable organization. The money comes into PA from ads and whatnot, they direct most (if not all) of it Childs Play (therefore writing it all off as a 'donation' to themselves), and set themselves up as administrators (therefore avoiding paying payroll taxes). And the money that comes directly from donors is just more income into the same de facto pool of cash (might be separated on paper, but they can pull whatever they want out of it as 'expenses'). But that income is not seen by the law as 'real' income, hence is tax free.

Re:Childs Play

[Chris Burke]

Wow. It's hard to find the words. Yeah, there are reasons to be cynical about corporate charities, like how tobacco company Philip Morris spent tons more on advertising about how charitable it was than on actual charity...

Right, or a great example today I heard on the radio. KFC is trying to raise $8.5 million to donate to cancer research. They're doing this by selling pink buckets of chicken at something like $8/pop, and donating $0.50 of each. This is the typical cynical corporate method of charity contributions: Making their donation dependent on product sales, advertising this fact, and thus trying to directly leverage their "generosity" into increased product sales. I wouldn't be surprised if they expected the extra sales to completely offset the donation itself.

If, instead, KFC just donated $8.5mil directly, even wrote that off their taxes, and didn't spend millions advertising their generosity, that would be fine. Getting some PR benefit out of charity is okay with me.

But dude, you can't let that cynicism blind you to real charity. I don't think you have any idea how hard volunteers for Child's Play work every year.

Yeah, he obviously has no idea what Child's Play is all about. There are a million easier ways to get the same tax benefit.

I have heard nothing, not even a rumor, of any funds from PA revenues being somehow 'laundered' through CPC.

Well I don't know about that, but I have heard rumors of foul play at the CP auction. ;)

Re:Childs Play

[theantipop]

The money comes into PA from ads and whatnot, they direct most (if not all) of it Childs Play (therefore writing it all off as a 'donation' to themselves), and set themselves up as administrators (therefore avoiding paying payroll taxes).

Where's your source for this? Everything I've heard about the way Child's Play is set up is that they distance it from PA Inc. as much as possible for two reasons. The first being that they don't want the image of the comic to draw ire towards the charity. Secondly, they don't want the possible collapse of their company to take down the charity.

Re:Childs Play

[Chris Burke]

Oh great. So now you've gone from accusing them of using CP to dodge taxes on their advertising revenue to accusing them of laundering charitable donations into their own pockets.

Do you have any evidence for any of this? Do you have any proof that the two of them are paying themselves wages as CP's "administrators"? Do you have any proof that they have extracted "expenses" from the pool of donations that were not actually expenses of the Child's Play charity, but rather expenses of Penny Arcade or simply profit-taking?

Because that all would have to be spelled out on their tax returns, and if those "expenses" weren't really expenses then they can't be claimed and the IRS would be on them like flies on shit. So you're not just accusing them of cynically taking advantage of the tax code, you're actually accusing them of being tax cheats. The law is very specific on what can actually be counted as charity and what can't.

You're a real piece of work, you know that? People are out there making a real difference in children's lives, and all you have is baseless accusations founded on cynicism. Cynicism for its own sake is wrong and stupid. And it also doesn't help anyone, unlike Child's Play.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

And all these volunteers are workers. Workers that provide 1000's of hours of labor, for free, to an organization. Now if all the employees of the organization took a legal vow of poverty, only received a living stipend, and the charity has no corporate 'sponsorship' (e.g. give us money and we will make you appear charitable) I would be cool with that. There are charities that do that and I support them. But as long as CP has salaried staff making money 'administering', no thanks.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

If they wanted to help they would give food, clothing, shelter, or just money. Giving a shiny Nintendo DS to a kid with a three pound tumor in his abdomen, while his parents are slowing bankrupted by medical bills, does nothing...other than sooth the conscience of the giver.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's not forget that it has donated money towards hospital equipment as well.

Re:Childs Play

[dank zappingly]

As I have noted from your other armchair legal opinions, you do not understand the law. You do not know anything about Penny Arcade's corporate structure or how they pay their bills or Child's Play's bills. You are accusing a charitable organization of fraud without any basis in reality. Here is a quick sample from the FAQ on their website: Q. Does Child's Play charge administrative fees? A. We try our best to have every dollar that comes in go right back to the hospitals, but there is a slight administrative cost that does get paid for with donations (for example, shipping $200,000 worth of Nintendo DS' to dozens of hospitals worldwide is not free, sadly). Historically, these charges have not exceeded 2-3%. It's true that we're a non-profit, but unlike most non-profits, we're not in it to create a self-sustainable entity. We do it to give. Again, I ask you to please stop polluting the internet with misinformation. These people are doing good work to make the lives of sick children better. By defaming them you are taking trolling to a whole new level.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

Sure, I would not come out ahead. But most corporation do. They are all very well aware that saying 'we give to X charity' will motivate people to spend their money with said corporation and they will make most if not all of it back (kind of like sponsoring a NASCAR racer). Just look at the explosion of all the 'think pink' breast cancer awareness crap that's come up in the past decade. It's the hot new thing to care about so companies from all across the spectrum are throwing a few grand at some charity (who then, in turn, pays their people with most of it) and then marketing that donation to people to promote the illusion of corporate humanity. Hell, look at how much Goldman Sachs gave to charity, while they were humping the whole country....

Re:Childs Play

[krmt]

You've apparently missed all the heartfelt and often tearful thank-yous they get from parents with their kids in the hospital. I was in the room only a few yards away from the woman who broke down crying during PAX East thanking them for doing Child's Play because such things meant so much to her. It's on the episode of their reality show for PAX East that came out recently if you want to see it for yourself. Child's Play does make a real difference in people's lives and that shouldn't be discounted.

Re:Childs Play

[Gailin]

You couldn't be more wrong. As an adult who recently went through 5 rounds of chemo and a bone marrow transplant. The 5 months overall I spent in the hospital over the last year were a lot better because I had an electronic outlet. For me this was my laptop and smartphone, for a child, it may be video game console. Don't underestimate how important it is to get your mind off the shiatty situation you are in.

There are lots of people and resources to give food, clothing, shelter and money. Of course, there can always be more. But don't denigrate a group simply because they found a unique and beneficial way of helping. Believe me its worth it and is appreciated.

Re:Childs Play

[sartin]

If they wanted to help they would give food, clothing, shelter, or just money. Giving a shiny Nintendo DS to a kid with a three pound tumor in his abdomen, while his parents are slowing bankrupted by medical bills, does nothing...other than sooth the conscience of the giver.

This is quite simply not true. My oldest son was on treatment for leukemia for 3 years and 2 months, so I have spent quite a lot of time in the children's oncology clinic. The clinic we went to does not receive games from Child Play, but from other sources. The kids in the clinic love the games and they make it a lot easier to be stuck in a chair doing a six hour infusion. Yes, it's true, some of these kids need clothing or shelter, and a distressing number of the parents face bankruptcy. That doesn't make the games a conscience-soothing gift. They actually deliver a lot of value for the majority of kids stuck at the clinic.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

Oh you mean PrincessRedDot (PRD) and maybe one or two others that in fact only make a living wage? I think you radically overestimate the financial scope of CPC's diabolical, faceless administration. You don't know anything other than your wild, baseless assumptions about CPC and its people. Whereas I have met and talked with PRD several times over many years. I have myself volunteered my time and with the help of my wife raised thousands for CPC through community events.

You want every charity to be run like a monastery that's your prerogative, but to act like CPC is some cabal of evil tax-dodging millionaire fat cats feeding off of an army of deluded rubes is so intellectually dishonest as to be disgusting and absurd. That is why your original post is rightly modded into oblivion.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

Alright, I've lost it. As parent of a child who has benefited from Seattle Children's Hospital's care more than once, let me say you must truly be the most bitter, irredeemable, self-righteous, scum-sucking, ignorant, foolish, truculent, and repugnant bastards I have ever had the misfortune of wasting my time reading. If you can't understand the value of bringing a small amount of fun engagement into the lives of children who may very well die slowly in the most agonizing pain imaginable, then you yourself are worthless, inhumane excuse of a being.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the hot new thing to care about so companies from all across the spectrum are throwing a few grand at some charity (who then, in turn, pays their people with most of it) and then marketing that donation to people to promote the illusion of corporate humanity.

Prove that Child's Play has done this, or admit that you're lying. There are no other options.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

His user page says he has kids, but as a parent I can't believe it. Nobody with kids could be so dense and so callous as to fail to understand, let alone denigrate, the value of any enjoyable distraction to a child in pain. If it's true, I really pity his kids. He's one sick puppy.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

Jerry and Mike receive no payments from CPC, that's just wild, speculative bullshit on Itninja's part. Kristen Lindsay (AKA PrincessRedDot or PRD) does, I believe, and maybe one or two others, but those are living wages, not wild profits.

Re:Childs Play

[sartin]

You can also write off the income of anyone designated at 'administrators' of the charitable organization.

Before today I was completely unaware of Child's Play, so I visited Guidestar to have a look at actual numbers. This information is from their 2007 form 990 (the latest I found at Guidestar and the one that probably looks worst for expenses). It fully discloses Penny Arcade's affiliation (gee, the IRS cares about people trying to wash salaries and actually checks this sort of thing).

• Three Penny Arcade shareholders are "Directors, Officers, Trustees, or Key Employees" - none receive any compensation from Child's Play and the three combined received $515,725.25 in compensation from Penny Arcade. Looks like they're missing a huge opportunity to wash salaries in the way described.
• They paid a $37,000 for a project manager to administer $384,059 of cash and non-cash (e.g. games) grants. They allocate the project manger half to program (giving stuff away) and half to fundraising. I am a little confused by the PM, since they list no employees or independent contractors in their highest paid list.
• They spent $41,669 on fundraising expenses, most of it in three areas: $6000 for professional fundraising, $18,500 for the PM, and $12,024 for travel.
• They held a fundraising auction that lost $23,441.

I have questions as a result of that (very quick and limited) review, but none in the area of trying to wash salaries. I'm curious about where the Project Manager expense actually goes. I'm curious about the disaster of an auction - why they did it, what they learned, whether they plan to try again. I fail to see evidence of the sort of fraud you are claiming.

Corporations get into charity for multiple reasons: good public relations, donating to related interests, belief in the cause. That doesn't make promoting or giving to a charity a fundamentally bad thing. Unless you have evidence to back up your claims, the evidence I've seen suggests they are unfounded.

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

Thank you for the informative background. I can illuminate the project manager a bit, she's Kristin Lindsay AKA Princess Reddot or PRD. I think there are some interviews out there on the intarwebs if you're interested. I think the 2007 auction was a flop because that was right about when the economy started to crash so people didn't really put as much into it that year. I doubt that previous or following years had similar failings.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

To each his own... I'm one of the least socially conservative people I know, and don't meet many people's definitions of "moralist," but the cursing can detract me from a webcomic where it's gratuitious. It's just my personal preference. I used to read a lot of Penny Arcade but one thing that really drove me (and probably a decent number of female readers) away was the Fruit Fucker. It was way too creepy for me. Yes, yes, I know they still have lots of female fans, some of whom love the Fruit Fucker. And yes, I know to find a juicer creepy is weird on my part. But there it is. See? Personal preference. I'm not saying they should ban the little dude or "teh swears." Just that it's not for me.

I also didn't like the abrupt about-face they took regarding the PS3 the minute they started getting free stuff.

Re:Childs Play

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody with kids could be so dense and so callous as to fail to understand, let alone denigrate, the value of any enjoyable distraction to a child in pain.

Unfortunately, that is not even slightly true. Despite what some parents think (not that I'm saying you're one of them), having kids does not grant special insight into...well, anything really.

Re:Childs Play

[D Ninja]

let me say you must truly be the most bitter, irredeemable, self-righteous, scum-sucking, ignorant, foolish, truculent, and repugnant bastards I have ever had the misfortune of wasting my time reading

That is a venerable dinner plate of adjectives. +1 Internet point for you, sir!

Re:Childs Play

[Knara]

It was more a case of the PS3 started being *available* and Sony pulled their head out of their asses. It was the same thing with the original Xbox. I do audio-production (and marginally participate) for a videogaming podcast, and the initial "what the fuck is sony doing, and why does the PS3 suck when the PS2 ruled) opinion slowly faded over time as the system began to be non-lame.

As for Fruit Fucker, I never really got what squicked people about it. It's a robot that fucks fruit. And? I mean, seriously.

Re:Childs Play

[The End Of Days]

Wow, you really need a hug. I mean I've known some bitter nerds but damn, son.

Re:Childs Play

[Chibi Merrow]

You're so full of shit.

One of my fondest possessions is a thank-you card with crayon drawings on it I received from Tulane's Children's Hospital in New Orleans for some video games I sent them through CP a couple years back. The donations get to the kids, and it really does make their lives better.

Re:Childs Play

[brkello]

I hope I die before I become as cynical as you.

Re:Childs Play

[B Nesson]

Step 1: Company X donates to Charity Y.
Step 2: Charity Y publicizes Company X's donation in some way.
Step 3: Customer Z chooses to do business with Company X due, in part, to hearing about their donation to Charity Y.
Step 4: ???
Step 5: Villainy!

Someone needs to put a stop to this! If people choose to do business with companies because of their charitable contributions, well that's only going to encourage more charitable contributions!

Re:Childs Play

[inu_maru]

It gives you insight, in, you know, raising kids (considering you do some parenting, anyway).
It will not automatically give you a higher ground or morals, but it surely teaches you a few things.

Re:Childs Play

[krmt]

I personally hope he's just trolling. Especially if you're right and he has kids.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

It's a little more like this:

Relationship Business Relationship - Shareholders In Penny Arcade
Name 1 Robert Khoo
President
Name 2 Keith G. Holkins
Treasurer
Name 2 Mike Krahulik
Secretary
Relationship Business Relationship - Shareholders In Penny Arcade


For the period, 10/01/07-09/30/08, the following amounts were paid by
Penny Arcade, Inc. to the Officers of Child's Play:
Michael R. Krakhulik Salary - $ 179,283.20
Keith G. Holkins Salary - $ 176,903.16
Robert Khoo Salary - $ 159,538.89
So, yeah....tell em again how this is a grad and noble venture.

Re:Childs Play

[Itninja]

What I am is the father of a son who has lost his sight (for awhile...it returned eventually...long story). When CP came to us in the hospital the dialog when something like this (a condensed version):
Hi! We would like to donate this Nintendo DS to you to make your son's scary and difficult time a little easier!
Gee thanks, but my son lost his vision.
Oh. Um, well....maybe you would like it instead?

It took a tremendous amount of self control not to punch this knob in the face. I mean WTH!? Give me money, food, clothes, pay for my hotel, but for Gods sake! I freaking video game??

Then when I took a look at CP's financing I lost all respect for them:

For the period, 10/01/07-09/30/08, the following amounts were paid by Penny Arcade, Inc. to the Officers of Child's Play: Michael R. Krakhulik Salary - $ 179,283.20 Keith G. Holkins Salary - $ 176,903.16 Robert Khoo Salary - $ 159,538.89

Re:Childs Play

[ElectricTurtle]

While I'm sure that your experience with your son was stressful and traumatic, what kind of self-centered, conceited asshole do you have to be not to be able to see that just because CPC couldn't do much for your son that does not negate the immeasurable value that they have provided to kids with cancer or other serious potentially fatal conditions. If you have a child in pain games are about the best way to get their minds off of that pain and brighten their mood however little. It's this fundamental lack of understanding that have made all your posts on this subject epic trolls.

How dense are you that you're bitching about Jerry, Mike, and Khoo's salaries. You're so fucking stupid that don't even read what you write yourself, so here's the emphasis: " amounts were paid by Penny Arcade, Inc. "

Yeah, that's right, money not from CPC, but just a disclosure of what they make as employees of PA Inc. from revenues of PA Inc. All of which are wholly separate from CPC, but are simply disclosed because they are coincidentally officers of CPC. Oh, the horror, they have jobs with another organization and they make money!!1 Idiot. Only one person is paid from CPC, Kristin Lindsay, and that was 37k in 2007. A living wage if even that.

So, yes, all of your allegations are demonstrably false, based on your own incapacity to understand how charities work or even what their tax disclosures mean. Though I should thank you, as without your ignorant cynicism as a foil I would never have had four +5 posts in a single topic. It takes an epic troll for that, and you were the right guy for the job.

I saw that in their post yesterday

[DRAGONWEEZEL]

When they commented that they have a bigger voice than Roger because the last time they checked they where above Oprah on the Time top 100 list.

I was like "NO WAY!" so I went, did some fact checking, and then voted to put them up to #1!!

Click the link here http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1972075_1976159,00.html
To vote for them!

PA is a great organization

[antifoidulus]

All they need is a decent web comic. Seriously the quality has dropped considerably in the last couple of years as it seems the comic is just an afterthought, they occaisionally put their heart into it and make a brilliant comic but for the mostpart I don't even chuckle anymore.

Re:PA is a great organization

[Seakip18]

Agreed. I feel like, while their brand has taken off(PAX, Rain-Slick Precipice, Child's Play), the comic quality has diminished to the point where it's hit or miss...more often being miss.

Same goes with Tycho's diatribes.

Honestly, I think that we're used to reading their stuff when they were bachelors. Now they are married and have kids, growing a gamer family. It'll probably click when I'm in the same situation they are, but right now it ain't.

Then again, this is only how I feel. I'm sure a lot of folks are pretty content with the quality of the site and what not.

If the comic/rants went to complete crap, the type of folks who read PA would quit reading it. (Then again, look at ctrl-alt-del...)

Re:PA is a great organization

[VorpalRodent]

Honestly, I think that we're used to reading their stuff when they were bachelors. Now they are married and have kids, growing a gamer family. It'll probably click when I'm in the same situation they are, but right now it ain't.

I think that's a legitimate comment on pretty much any observer/commentator/etc. As their life changes, so does their viewpoint.

Now that I'm married, and have my first child, I'm looking at Penny Arcade and appreciating the viewpoints of individuals who make gaming a way to bond with their kids more. If I weren't in this situation, as you rightly point out, their viewpoint might be a little too distant from my own to really click.

Such is the nature of influence - you need to have some common ground to really have influence on any kind of personal level.

Re:PA is a great organization

[halcyon1234]

All they need is a decent web comic. Seriously the quality has dropped considerably in the last couple of years as it seems the comic is just an afterthought, they occaisionally put their heart into it and make a brilliant comic but for the mostpart I don't even chuckle anymore.

"Internet message boards were funnier 10 years ago. I've kinda stopped reading their new posts" - Simpsons writer Matt Warburton

Re:PA is a great organization

[Knara]

Well, the writing has certainly evolved, so if you wanted the comic to stay exactly the same, I dare say that you'd be disappointed with any long-running comic strip.

Incidentally, RSP got discontinued now. I suspect they had problems with the studio and/or the revenue wasn't great enough to justify the time spent. I know for my part, I didn't even know Episode 2 had been released.

As for the others, realize that Gabe and Tycho are involved "conceptually" with many things, but have a rather large staff now to handle those. Their main task is still the same as its always been: make a comic.

Re:PA is a great organization

[slodan]

I think they are progressing in their craft and growing as artists. When they started, it was just about making jokes. As you move through the comics, you can see the evolution of their personae, their cast of characters, and especially their point of view. Today, Penny Arcade produces comics that are a social commentary on the gaming industry. Their goals have expanded from making people laugh to representing gaming as a serious social movement.

Brand Control

[AceJohnny]

I've always envied their ability to maintain control over their brand and use it for appropriately portioned good and evil ;)

From what I've understood from their past posts and various interviews, they owe a lot to their business manager, Robert Khoo.

They like explaining how they actually sold their brand and rights away before Khoo came aboard. Luckily, the buyer disappeared into bankruptcy and nobody else has since claimed that ownership. I'm not too sure of the details and current veracity of this :)

Re:Brand Control

[jandrese]

Wasn't that the book rights? Way back when nobody took Webcomics seriously they basically signed away their rights to a scuzzy publisher and paid him to start publishing. He then took the money and fled to the Alaska wilderness or something and then promised to sue them if they ever tried to do something with their IP. Basically IP blackmail. After several years of court battles they got the rights back and that's when they partnered up with Dark Horse for the current books.

Of course I can't help but to notice that they appear to be a few books behind again. I'm wondering if something soured in their deal with Dark Horse? Also, the videogame sequels were canceled due to poor sales of the second game.

Re:Brand Control

[Knara]

There were apparently two situations there. One they sold the comic publishing rights, but the company that got the rights went "poof" and the rights reverted back to PA.

The other they paid some dude to publish the first book, who apparently did who knows what with the money, and after years of mystical legal maneuvering at the start of the Khoo era, they got them back.

But,yeah. PA as it exists today as a corporate functioning entity is due to Khoo's abilities.

The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think that most people here, or at Digg, or at reddit truly find comics like Penny Arcade or xkcd as being funny.

However, I think there's a misconception within the community as a whole that the other members do find them funny. In reality, virtually nobody finds them funny, but because everyone thinks that everyone else finds them funny, everyone links to those comics and then everyone fakes laughter anyway.

This misconception just causes the cycle to run perpetually. Now, we can break it by having enough people publicly admit that they find those comics to be absolutely pathetic, and to shun anyone who dares reference those comics as if they were funny.

So let me start: Penny Arcade is not funny. xkcd is not funny. Don't bother referencing them, we won't find them funny!

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think that most people here, or at Digg, or at reddit truly find comics like Penny Arcade or xkcd as being funny.

However, I think there's a misconception within the community as a whole that the other members do find them funny. In reality, virtually nobody finds them funny, but because everyone thinks that everyone else finds them funny, everyone links to those comics and then everyone fakes laughter anyway.

This misconception just causes the cycle to run perpetually. Now, we can break it by having enough people publicly admit that they find those comics to be absolutely pathetic, and to shun anyone who dares reference those comics as if they were funny.

So let me start: Penny Arcade is not funny. xkcd is not funny. Don't bother referencing them, we won't find them funny!

What about nigger jokes? Most of those are funny except you feel like it's bad to laugh at them, so you feign offense instead. I've known too many black people who had a great sense of humor and were able to laugh at such jokes so long as they knew you well enough to know you're not really a racist. So I think that's what the deal is, the whole PC bullshit.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Enderandrew]

You're suggesting that people only pretend to like things that are popular. How did they get popular to begin with?

And why doesn't everyone here pretend to like Twilight? It's genre fiction and insanely popular. Maybe the Slashdot crowd likes XKCD because it is great, and they hate Twilight because it is crap.

Just maybe.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[TheSambassador]

You're right! Your "I don't think anybody finds it funny" argument is flawless. Now I realize that I only found their comics funny because I thought that, somewhere, SOMEBODY else thought they were funny. Eager to fit in, I quickly forced and tricked myself into enjoying it. THANK YOU for showing me the light.

I mean, why would I ever find awkward phrases like "Do you have snakes that come in sometimes? Don't stand for that shit!" hilarious?

All webcomics, hell all COMEDY is hit and miss. I cannot say that because one thing a person does is funny, everything else that that person does must necessarily be funny or else the first thing becomes unfunny. I find Penny-Arcade to be more often funny than not... so I like it. You might disagree.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[TheNumberless]

So let me start: Penny Arcade is not funny. xkcd is not funny. Don't bother referencing them, we won't find them funny!

Since we're doing the whole opinions-as-facts thing: xkcd and Penny Arcade are funny because I find them funny.

It's neat that a lot of people seem to agree, but my opinion of their humor doesn't require it.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Dishevel]

I find about 70% of the xkcd I run into funny.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Beardo the Bearded]

I hate Twilight for the same reason I hate Monster Cable.

Awww, FUCK! Why didn't I think of that first?

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Maria D]

Speak for yourself, please. I find both funny. There are among (very few) things I read as soon as they update, checking several times a day. At any given time, there are probably several printouts of each pinned around my house.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[mwvdlee]

So let me start: Penny Arcade is not funny. xkcd is not funny. Don't bother referencing them, we won't find them funny!

Coincidentally, you are not modded funny either. Instead you are modded troll. Which, I guess, in itself IS funny. We're laughing AT you, not WITH you.
But by all means, please enlighten us; what IS funny?

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

I find some of XKCD funny, but I probably find a higher percentage of XKCD Sucks funny.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[nomadic]

I find about 70% of the xkcd I run into funny.

XKCD can be funny a lot of times, but I also find it frequently unbearably smug. Not old school nerd, more like the newer trendy hipster nerd thing that cropped up in the past few years.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[soppsa]

Yea I agree with this, and it wasn't always the case. XKCD used to be mostly hit for me, but the last couple years the smugness has been overwhelming.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[IICV]

I mean, why would I ever find awkward phrases like "Do you have snakes that come in sometimes? Don't stand for that shit!" hilarious?

.... because you've read Skymall, and that is actually what the writing in the magazine is like? The whole thing is one giant ball of awkward, badly-written text that you read only because there's absolutely nothing else to do, and sometimes the products are unintentionally hilarious (like the hearing aid that looks like a Bluetooth headset).

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Late Adopter]

XKCD can be funny a lot of times, but I also find it frequently unbearably smug.

So do I, and so do the authors of http://xkcdexplained.com/

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[hldn]

And why doesn't everyone here pretend to like Twilight? It's genre fiction and insanely popular. Maybe the Slashdot crowd likes XKCD because it is great, and they hate Twilight because it is crap.

maybe twihards like twilight because it's great and they hate xkcd because it's crap?

or perhaps it's just because different people enjoy different things? nah, couldn't be that.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, definitely not. xkcd is terrible writing mixed with terrible art.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

People only pretend to like things that are popular with what they consider their peer-group.

Usually things get popular by starting with a single person or small group of people that are influential within that peer group. The rest follow them.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[k_187]

That is far funnier than any xkcd has been. Bravo

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretending to like something popular is not as bothersome as pretending to hate something popular. Lots of people apparently hate Twilight, but when you bother to talk to them, few of them seem to know more than some vague complaint or parody they saw on the internet. As it seems, they criticize something they barely know about just because it makes them feel superior, somehow. Often these people are not nearly as judgemental with what they like, which may be of dubious quality as well.

Anyway, popularity shouldn't determine whether someone likes or dislikes something. Popularity isn't worth much, since different works are made for different publics. Preferences are subjective. Still, if I had to choose, I'd rather have people pretending to like something around me, since at least they are not putting so much effort in ruining the fun of other people.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Oldstench]

http://goatkcd.com/ is the best realization of the comic, by far.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[GasparGMSwordsman]

And why doesn't everyone here pretend to like Twilight?

Who doesn't like vampires who "sparkle" in the sun?

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

Penny Arcade is not funny. xkcd is not funny. Don't bother referencing them, we won't find them funny!

Speak for yourself. I love both of these comics and have at least a dozen friends who do as well.

I think your post is more telling about yourself - you apparently laugh at things that you don't really like, and so think that everybody else does the same.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

But nothing has more smug than old-school nerd. Those 70s era greenscreen worshipping neckbeards who whine because normal people are allowed to use computers now are the kings of thinking they're better than everyone else with no real substance backing the belief.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

People only pretend to like things that are popular with what they consider their peer-group.

Usually things get popular by starting with a single person or small group of people that are influential within that peer group. The rest follow them.

Please come to my office. I do a lot of PowerPoint presentations, but my projector is about to die, and I think I could easily replace it with you.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[TiberiusMonkey]

No, definitely not. xkcd is terrible writing mixed with terrible art.

You sir, are a Philistine.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Lacanian framework, we, as human beings, search for identity. To boil it down, two things must happen: we must be able to recognize ourselves, and recognize the Other. The technically minded see something of themselves in XKCD, and the gamer culture sees something of themselves in Penny Arcade. It has nothing to do with actually being funny -- it's merely a self-defining shared experience. (Self and shared: the schizophrenia of our times as espoused by Deleuze and Guattari.)

The disassociation from Twilight is about recognizing the Other. The people who frequent these fora recognize in themselves something that is inherently distinct from not only the content of the Twilight novels, but the fan culture surrounding them. It's not about the novels being good or bad: we don't like them as it encapsulates and represents Otherness.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Chris Burke]

Oh yeah, cus nothing says "down to earth" like meta-analysis.

Not that it wasn't funny. Or that xkcd isn't smug. Or that it isn't funny despite being smug.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[tunapez]

please, please, please tell me you have a/many tween(s) and you only came about that knowledge under the duress of being outvoted at the Sunday matinee w/ said tween(s).

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[wastedlife]

Really? Have you read even an excerpt of any of the Twilight books? They make R. L. Stein look like the next Charles Dickens. They are romance novels written by a Mormon. I refuse to believe that anyone over 12 years old can enjoy Twilight without having some sort of mental disability.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[wastedlife]

Maybe I'm a freak, but I have actually read an excerpt from one of the Twilight novels (I have a Kindle and downloading samples is very easy). It really is as terrible as the uninformed haters make it out to be, possibly worse. I also enjoy many things of dubious quality, my reading, gaming, television and movie preferences would make a critic in the field squeal. Its all about being honest with yourself, and giving things a fair shake. And, I'm sorry, but Twilight is awful.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

The overwhelming majority of the "smugness" is projected onto it, not anything that is actually expressed by the comic.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[rdnetto]

I agree, but I don't read it just for the funny. I read it for the occasional insightful and sad.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[rakslice]

"smug"? Too self satisfied? Too self satisfied for what? Should it be living up to some kind of greater "web comic purpose"?

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[rakslice]

The mix of hopeless squares and trolls in the comments there is priceless. I'm not entirely sure if the blog runner understands that their blog is ironic humour, but it doesn't really matter in the end.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets leave the middle east out of this.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[GasparGMSwordsman]

I assumed that the /sarcasm wasn't needed. I was apparently wrong...

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[Zot Quixote]

This is perhaps too harsh. XKCD is sometimes funny and sometimes insightful. Sometimes its not. Randall seems to have become more taken with himself over time which is a bad thing, because the art is brilliant if its a non-artist expressing himself the only way he knows how, OTOH its terrible if its from someone who thinks they are a gift to the art world.

PA used to be funnier and they do phone it in a lot of the time now, but they at least try to do some other things and take it in artistic directions that interest them, which I can respect.

I will say I've been reading qwantz for as long as those other two, and it is still funny, although it doesn't really evolve as a comic. <_< OK...that pun was terrible.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[fishexe]

XKCD can be funny a lot of times, but I also find it frequently unbearably smug. Not old school nerd, more like the newer trendy hipster nerd thing that cropped up in the past few years.

See, that's the shit you get when nerds start getting laid.

Re:The it's-not-funny-but-we-laugh-anyway loop.

[nomadic]

See, that's the shit you get when nerds start getting laid.

That's what I meant exactly! These new, sex-having nerds are poseurs, they didn't go through what we did.

bizYnatch

[Anonymous Coward]

So that their and enjoy aal the 4, w4ich by all

Jealous much?

[spun]

Here are we have popular geeks who make a living making little pictures and writing little stories for. Everyone loves them. They are witty and funny and frequently have sex with actual women and are everything you are not. Do you know there's a guy who has a whole boring ass blog about how xkcd isn't funny? Nobody reads it, because we all think xkcd IS funny. Penny arcade IS funny. You and the other haters are either too stupid to find the humor, or too jealous to admit it. Once you have achieved something in your life, I doubt you will feel the need to put other achievers down. Maybe you should try, you know, doing something, rather than bitching about the people who do.

Re:Jealous much?

[Wyatt Earp]

I don't hate them, as I said "I'm a big fan of the brand and PAX, but I really have a hard time finding anything enjoyable about their writing."

I didn't bitch about them, I've supported them by buying merchandize and going to PAX, just stating I'm not a fan of their writing style most of the time.

Re:Jealous much?

[spun]

I wasn't referring to you, but to the AC.

Re:Jealous much?

[Wyatt Earp]

Sorry, I missed the AC. Cool.

Re:Jealous much?

[Anonymous Coward]

I whole-heartedly concur with this man! For the record, I am not an Anonymous Coward. MediaCastleX is just Incredibly Lazy and didn't bother to log-in...

Hypocrisy much?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you bitching about people who bitch?

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[spun]

I'm bitching about talentless losers who demean others out of jealousy rather than any real critique. That's hardly hypocritical.

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[Dogtanian]

I'm bitching about talentless losers who demean others out of jealousy rather than any real critique. That's hardly hypocritical.

It is if you're doing it because you're jealous of them. (^_^)

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[spun]

You know what? I am, a little, in my darker moments. I sometimes wish I was stupid (because seeing and knowing too much can be painful) and talentless (because I think talent comes with a responsibility to use it.) Ah, if only I were one of the lazy slobs, my life would be easier and I would be profoundly comfortable in my ignorance.

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[Anonymous Coward]

You already are. You're just ignorant of it.

Seriously, iof

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[spun]

God damn, I love the fact that little shits like you feel compelled to snipe at me. I'm forcing you to react, which makes you my bitch. You've really brightened up my day.

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[Anonymous Coward]

Different AC here, but FYI, the "you responded therefore you are my puppet" gambit is at least as old as the Internet itself, andthose who have use it never even manage to convince themselves, let alone the people they so desperately want to believe they're "manipulating". There has never been an exception, and there never will or could be.

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[Anonymous Coward]

And this way lies madness.

Re:Hypocrisy much?

[fishexe]

Why are you bitching about people who bitch?

How about I bitch about people who crassly, obnoxiously and egregiously use adjectives as verbs? You could at least do us the courtesy of adding a clumsy ending, like -ize.

The *very* broken clock.

[Tei]

It seems is easy to be a guru on the internet. You can make lots of weird predictions, and some will be right.

Like this 2006 comic:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/05/01/
And this today news:
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/54532/Activision-Bungie-Sign-Ten-Year-Publishing-Partnership

And this part of the reason Penny Arcade is still relevant.. theres a lot of predictions, and some are right.

You want funny? Go to Zero Punctuation!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation

This chap knows how to review a game.

I am not a gamer, barely play video games but this Brit makes a frankly dull subject come alive with incredible hilarity.

Re:You want funny? Go to Zero Punctuation!

[li99sh79]

There is a remarkable sameness to Yahtzee's work that, quite frankly, grows tiresome after a while.

Re:You want funny? Go to Zero Punctuation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Frankly, I was a bit disappointed after his review of Heavy Rain. Didn't even take the opportunity to "Press X to Jason"

Can you stop calling it a brand?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously.

Re:Can you stop calling it a brand?

[ElectricTurtle]

I'm a rabid PA fan and apologist, but even I can admit it's a brand. They run a company to make money. They have a trademark identity as a primary means of accomplishing that goal. That is a brand. The end.

Re:Can you stop calling it a brand?

[catbertscousin]

More power to them. If they can make a living off what they enjoy, and through it give enjoyment to a lot of other people, I'd say they're doing better than most of us. What's the point in demanding people entertain us for free, out of their spare time and the goodness of their hearts? (Plus webcomics like that tend to have really erratic update schedules.)

Time does not make My 100. ;)

[Hurricane78]

Interesting, how they struggle to stay important, by judging others, and sucking the cattle into their reality.
Unfortunately, in actual reality, they are long fallen into irrelevance. Or has anyone of you ever bought a issue of the Time magazine? I honestly don’t know a single person. And I don’t know a reason why I should. (Hello Time marketing? *nudgenudge*)

It’s not that I don’t wish them all the best. It’s just, that maybe finding a new business model and purpose would be a good idea. :)

Maintaining brand control

[u8i9o0]

CmdrTaco writes:

I've always envied their ability to maintain control over their brand and ...

That reminds me of the time they signed away their book publishing rights and nearly lost the rights to their intellectual property and the name Penny Arcade. Except for that, I agree.
I'm a big PA fan, but they totally needed a business manager. And since I'm writing about him, I love this anecdote about Robert Khoo.

WTF is time 100?

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF is time 100?

Re:WTF is time 100?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're on the internet. Look it up.

well, there is this little tiny game called

[DRAGONWEEZEL]

World of Warcraft...
it's about 1/3 the way there. Pretty effing amazing for a game.

Re:well, there is this little tiny game called

[spun]

How many people, worldwide total, have played WoW? How many have seen Star Wars? How many people have quoted a line from WoW, versus the number who have quoted Scarface "Say hello to my lil' friend" or Jerry Maguire "Show me the money" or "You had me at hello."

I, for one, have never played WoW and know next to nothing about it. I've never watched Jerry Maguire but I know all about it and can quote lines.

Video games are where comics were 40-50 years ago, some great art but still seen mostly as entertainment for juvenile boys.

Time to move on...

[DarthVain]

Last I checked the list was full of Korean Pop stars and Figure Skaters.

I would say that somehow S. Korea folks were really aware of this, and/or no one else cared.

I would say that "Time" hasn't quite figured out this thing called "Cyberspace" and perhaps their "Time" has long since passed.

I mean how many years ago was it when Stephen Cobare would join just about any internet voting thing, nominate himself, plug it on his show, and get bridges, space station equipment, and a variety of other crap named after himself. I think the ultimate joke was how stupid these "contests" were.

My personal favorite was up here in Canada where "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" a political satire comedy news show not unlike "The Daily Show" (predated it actually by many years) made fun of stupid politician (Stockwell Day) who wanted a referendum on ANY topic where someone could get 1% of the population to sign a petition. So they ran a petition on their website, and plugged it on their show to have a referendum about changing Stockwell Day's name to "Doris Day". They got the over 300,000 signatures they needed, proving that this was a very stupid idea. Gold, Jerry Gold!

You've never read Moby-Dick

[Kupfernigk]

Moby-Dick is a great book. OK, It's a little harder to read than kindergarten reading primers, but droning on it does not do. You get everything from the technology of whaling to the problems of dealing with a psychopath on an isolated boat. It is a truly great American novel. But, like anything else with lots of food for thought, what you see in it is a measure of your own ability, not the writer's.

Re:You've never read Moby-Dick

[AK Marc]

Moby-Dick is a great book.

There's a chapter on a whale forehead. A whole chapter. I read it. I didn't believe it. I read the chapter again just to make sure I didn't miss anything. The only book I've ever fallen asleep reading is Moby Dick. And I've read somewhere around 1,000,000 pages of text and fallen asleep exactly once.

I'd rather read Clancy's entire chapter in The Sum of All Fears on a nuclear bomb explosion from detonation to the shockwave hitting the outer casing (at least I think it was an entire chapter, I don't memorize chapter size). It's much lower in literary quality, but technology is more interesting than whale anatomy to me.

Moby Dick also wins the award for having the most boring Cliff's Notes as well. And yes, I read the Cliff's Notes for all the classics. Especially with cultural changes and such, it is almost necessary to have an annotated version of the classic works to understand them, and the Cliff's Notes do a horrible (yet barely adequate) job of that.

Moby Dick

[imhennessy]

I find Moby Dick to be quite a bit of fun. You just have to skip the plot and get into the geekery of whaling and sailing. Oh, and don't worry about accuracy.

ivan

They just lost it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Time removed moot entirely because 4chan can and will do it for the lulz.

yeah, I never said surpassed

[DRAGONWEEZEL]

I hope you got reread all of that.

I agree w/ your post. I just said WoW was about 1/3 the way there. 2/3rds is a long way to go.

There is a huge gap though. Look at the time frame of the movies your talking about, they are vastly different by generation. If you were to ask the same SW crowd Who their favorite bands were it'd be Led Zepplin & Black Sabbath or Van Halen (David Lee Roth)

My generation might say Metallica and R.E.M. or Van Hagar

The current 15-25 yo population might say blink 182 or Lady GaGa or Cold Play

The comparison between mediums isn't the apples to apples either though, because, while I can show you an old movie like star wars, or Real Genius in a few hours, you'd look at it and go OMG that looks so cheezy & fake...

Imagine trying to show someone accustomed to the X-box 360 and make them sit through 15 hrs of Wolfenstein. I loved the game, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone...Today.

The comparison just isn't there, two totally different mediums.

When we talk about influence though, SW had a huge influence & it spanned multiple generations w/ a HUGE distance between releases of the 456 and 123!

WoW just started, and in the newest generations everyone knows what WoW is. Video games 10 years ago were where silent film was 100 years ago. The best videogames right now are at the level star wars was when it first came out. In the next 10 years, a convergence will happen, and video games will suck like star wars 1,2,& 3, but after that should grow into epic tales like LOTR, Harry Potter, IronMan (I), Avatar, etc..

I have to point something out...

[Benfea]

...it is entirely possible that Twilight is not crap and that slashdotters don't like it because the target audience is teenage girls, a demographic largely missing from this group.

Mind you, I said possible. I have not read the books nor seen the movies, but based on what I've read it probably is crap. I just brought this up to mention that there might be other considerations at play here. You made it sound like anything not liked by us must be of low quality, and that simply isn't true.