Game Dogs: Episode Six: The Cleric
- Thread starter Russ Pitts
- Start date
This is still pathetic. I don't understand why people are saying this is getting better. You've descended into a very, very, very commonly used section of material.
1. Oh, we have a girl.
2. Oh, we will play D&D with her.
3. Oh, we will make sexist jokes at her expense.
4. Oh...for some bizarre reason, she will put up with it and allow the man-children to use her instead of getting friends who respect her.
1. Oh, we have a girl.
2. Oh, we will play D&D with her.
3. Oh, we will make sexist jokes at her expense.
4. Oh...for some bizarre reason, she will put up with it and allow the man-children to use her instead of getting friends who respect her.
It all goes hand in hand to make:historybuff said:
5. Oh, the majority of viewers have left with the opinion that this has more suck than an imploding star but we'll keep churning it out anyway because apparently we know better, and this is our site so we'll do what we want to so there, nyah.
I pretty much agree with a lot of the criticism there.Firia said:I'm reposting the critique of someone that echos my sentiment (rather than reitterating what he's said. I feel like it's just the ticket to make Game Dogs really work, rather than keeping it as is (which judging by past replies, shows a sour turn out).
daedrick said:
I don't nessessarily want Game Dogs to go away. I don't enjoy it, but I want to offer up things that may help it become more successful, rather than rag on it. If the creators don't care to make changes, and like where they're going with things, that's cool too.Just not my kinda show, I guess.
But, after 6 episodes, there is no sign of the authors taking on any criticism from their audience. They haven't responded as to why they are making the design decisions and haven't made any moves towards changing things. The biggest and easiest thing to fix would be removing the "this was animated before a live studio audience", and still no signs of that changing.
The other thing that I think is going to get boring to those who aren't already sick of this series is the fact that there are no changes of scenery. It's all in the same place for each episode.
I think there is a small chance of this show getting decent, but it still hasn't made it. Gary's just gotten annoying, and Bethany's constant saying "sigh" and "grr" gets just as bad. Someone else on this thread said something about breaking them away from the office or something, and I think that would work well, especially after you guys run into using UR jokes :/ I don't normally mind a cameo reference or using another persons joke, but you should at least use it in such a way that it makes those who know it appreciate it just as much as they did when the original person said it. And on that note, it would've made more sense for Roger and Chet to switch lines on that portion of the show. Anyways, I'm hoping this show will get better, but... we'll see.
Still improving. The dialogue seems a little more comfortable, that's a good sign. I actually chuckled at just the way Chet and Roger were talking to each other once.
Recommendations: Seriously, I agree with everyone else in that you seriously need to drop the 'live audience animation' thing. Also the Gary 'insane' thing. I actually like the idea of making him say a different thing each episiode.
As for Bethany, I'm glad that she actually has some lines now and some traces of personality, but I'm worried she's starting to come out as a one-sided character: i.e. all her jokes are about sexism. Seriously, that character's been done before, and it's frankly not funny. She's never going to jive with the other characters if all they ever do is make pseudomysoginy jokes. One or two of those every now and then would be alright, but this is two episodes in a row and I'm starting to think its becoming a trend.
In general, though, I think the most important thing is just to be more outgoing in the writing. As it is, the show doesn't push any envelopes, and almost seems to be TRYING to be subdued and subtle. Believe me, sublte is the last thing the show needs. Seriously, man, go nuts!! Nobody will blame you at all if the next epidode is totally off the wall. Take it to different settings, throw in some slapstick, make some Scotland jokes, ANYTHING. The worst that could happen is that the new ideas flop, which isn't much worse than where you are now.
Also, experiment with the facial expressions and voice acting a bit more. Chet's ablilty to be goofy is kind of hampered because he always has this weird serious expression on his face.
Hope this helps.
PS. BTW, you've got something there with Bob...keep him as a recurring character, but PLEASE don't overuse him and make him a chichè...
EDIT: Oh, and the swearing element that made its debut in this episode...toy around with it, it might work, just...don't make Roger do it. Nerds like him just don't swear.
Recommendations: Seriously, I agree with everyone else in that you seriously need to drop the 'live audience animation' thing. Also the Gary 'insane' thing. I actually like the idea of making him say a different thing each episiode.
As for Bethany, I'm glad that she actually has some lines now and some traces of personality, but I'm worried she's starting to come out as a one-sided character: i.e. all her jokes are about sexism. Seriously, that character's been done before, and it's frankly not funny. She's never going to jive with the other characters if all they ever do is make pseudomysoginy jokes. One or two of those every now and then would be alright, but this is two episodes in a row and I'm starting to think its becoming a trend.
In general, though, I think the most important thing is just to be more outgoing in the writing. As it is, the show doesn't push any envelopes, and almost seems to be TRYING to be subdued and subtle. Believe me, sublte is the last thing the show needs. Seriously, man, go nuts!! Nobody will blame you at all if the next epidode is totally off the wall. Take it to different settings, throw in some slapstick, make some Scotland jokes, ANYTHING. The worst that could happen is that the new ideas flop, which isn't much worse than where you are now.
Also, experiment with the facial expressions and voice acting a bit more. Chet's ablilty to be goofy is kind of hampered because he always has this weird serious expression on his face.
Hope this helps.
PS. BTW, you've got something there with Bob...keep him as a recurring character, but PLEASE don't overuse him and make him a chichè...
EDIT: Oh, and the swearing element that made its debut in this episode...toy around with it, it might work, just...don't make Roger do it. Nerds like him just don't swear.
This one statement was exponentially funnier than the entirety of Game Dogs.Mirrorknight said:
Wait a minute. Strike that. Nothing to the power of anything is still nothing.
The more series I enjoy on this site, the more I have to look forward to during the week. So I'm trying hard to enjoy this series. I honestly hated the pilot and first couple of episodes, but I've been warming up to these last ones. As a member of the audience I'd like to offer a couple of suggestions and opinions, with a grain of salt and all that, and am curious if anybody else here agrees or is thinking the same way.
Please get rid of the little dog asking if I'm insane at the beginning of the episode. I didn't think it was particularly amusing the first time and that hasn't changed as I've been watching him in the series. In fact, I think it sets a weird unpleasant tone for the rest of the episode.
Please get rid of the "animated before a live studio audience bit" in the beginning as well. Same reasons as above, plus it feels decidedly unoriginal and somewhat... patronizing? As in "I get the joke, it's just not that clever to be telling it at the beginning of every episode."
Please change the series' logo. Having the main characters smiling around that one dog that's looking straight at me while pointing his pistol-posed-hands at me as if he were thinking "Heyyyyy" is... no good.
I know that's just nitpicking, but nits must die.
I get the sense that most of the characters (and the actual humor) so far fall into pretty standard, predictable types. There's the nerdy, pushover dog; the laid-back "don't have a cow" dog; the token pretty girl dog; and the over-bearing boss dog thing. That's fine and dandy and characters will always fall into one basic type or another, but I find myself seriously disliking them due to their lack of depth. I think people react to characters in a positive way when they are developed from a dynamic that comes from the interactions of several layers within the character, regardless of the actual character and his actions being agreeable or likable. There's a difference between disliking or disagreeing with a character that you can still genuinely relate to, and disliking a character because it hasn't been well developed (essentially becoming a non-character). That said, I did think it was funny earlier on (I think it was the 2nd episode) when the nerdy dog busted out with a sword and threatened the boss with it, but he then promptly returned to his one dimensional nerd type while the other character kept saying things like "man" and "radical."
I'm not saying that characters should constantly behave in a manner that's inconsistent with their type (that would just make them schizoid... although THAT would be an interesting character to have), but characters are given depth and become more well defined when you show and reconcile behavior that on the surface seems to contradict who you thought they were. So for example, the nerdy pushover character pulls out a sword and threatens his boss. How does that reconcile with his character? Well, he must be a nerdy pushover character with repressed aggression. Interesting. How does his repressed aggression show itself in different circumstances? How does that interact with another character's traits? And finally, how is that funny and entertaining? I should say that I don't believe we get there by just planning it, although there's a place for planning things out. I believe this mainly happens during the actual creative process if we're open to it and allow for it to happen.
Finally, there's something about the actual themes in the humor and circumstances that come up that I think could be much better. The main idea of the office dynamic seems to be: disconnected upper management (Mr. Yee); kinda fascist, mean middle management (little dog thing - what is he, a chihuahua?); and nonconformist youth thing (the rest). And that's all well and good, but it needs more depth. And I think we get depth by presenting the theme in as many different ways as we can. So far we only have that one presentation of office dynamics, and it's way too flat, which makes it kinda predictable and boring. Another example in the last couple of episodes is the whole misogynist theme. There were some jokes and the girl rolled her eyes and sighed alot (by literally saying the word "sigh," which I feel was a mistake). And that was it. The episodes remained inside the boundaries of the cliched stereotyped theme which, again, becomes predictable and boring but this time I was kinda insulted as well. The novelty of having cartoon dogs acting like humans isn't enough; like a mediocre shooter with awesome graphics you get over it quickly and realize it's not that great a game.
I know we're just 6 episodes in, but I think most people can instinctively and rather quickly tell whether a show has something genuine to offer or is hiding behind types and cliches or novelty and shock value to impress. And I think there's really alot that can be done with the basic idea here.
Well that turned out to be longer than I expected. I realize I'm not the one with the actual responsibility of putting a series together and presenting it to an audience, and reading back I recognize I'm being pretty pretentious and getting worked up over a cartoon. Still, a better series would be better for all of us, and I hope someone finds something of value in my rant.
Anybody else thinking along these lines?
Please get rid of the little dog asking if I'm insane at the beginning of the episode. I didn't think it was particularly amusing the first time and that hasn't changed as I've been watching him in the series. In fact, I think it sets a weird unpleasant tone for the rest of the episode.
Please get rid of the "animated before a live studio audience bit" in the beginning as well. Same reasons as above, plus it feels decidedly unoriginal and somewhat... patronizing? As in "I get the joke, it's just not that clever to be telling it at the beginning of every episode."
Please change the series' logo. Having the main characters smiling around that one dog that's looking straight at me while pointing his pistol-posed-hands at me as if he were thinking "Heyyyyy" is... no good.
I know that's just nitpicking, but nits must die.
I get the sense that most of the characters (and the actual humor) so far fall into pretty standard, predictable types. There's the nerdy, pushover dog; the laid-back "don't have a cow" dog; the token pretty girl dog; and the over-bearing boss dog thing. That's fine and dandy and characters will always fall into one basic type or another, but I find myself seriously disliking them due to their lack of depth. I think people react to characters in a positive way when they are developed from a dynamic that comes from the interactions of several layers within the character, regardless of the actual character and his actions being agreeable or likable. There's a difference between disliking or disagreeing with a character that you can still genuinely relate to, and disliking a character because it hasn't been well developed (essentially becoming a non-character). That said, I did think it was funny earlier on (I think it was the 2nd episode) when the nerdy dog busted out with a sword and threatened the boss with it, but he then promptly returned to his one dimensional nerd type while the other character kept saying things like "man" and "radical."
I'm not saying that characters should constantly behave in a manner that's inconsistent with their type (that would just make them schizoid... although THAT would be an interesting character to have), but characters are given depth and become more well defined when you show and reconcile behavior that on the surface seems to contradict who you thought they were. So for example, the nerdy pushover character pulls out a sword and threatens his boss. How does that reconcile with his character? Well, he must be a nerdy pushover character with repressed aggression. Interesting. How does his repressed aggression show itself in different circumstances? How does that interact with another character's traits? And finally, how is that funny and entertaining? I should say that I don't believe we get there by just planning it, although there's a place for planning things out. I believe this mainly happens during the actual creative process if we're open to it and allow for it to happen.
Finally, there's something about the actual themes in the humor and circumstances that come up that I think could be much better. The main idea of the office dynamic seems to be: disconnected upper management (Mr. Yee); kinda fascist, mean middle management (little dog thing - what is he, a chihuahua?); and nonconformist youth thing (the rest). And that's all well and good, but it needs more depth. And I think we get depth by presenting the theme in as many different ways as we can. So far we only have that one presentation of office dynamics, and it's way too flat, which makes it kinda predictable and boring. Another example in the last couple of episodes is the whole misogynist theme. There were some jokes and the girl rolled her eyes and sighed alot (by literally saying the word "sigh," which I feel was a mistake). And that was it. The episodes remained inside the boundaries of the cliched stereotyped theme which, again, becomes predictable and boring but this time I was kinda insulted as well. The novelty of having cartoon dogs acting like humans isn't enough; like a mediocre shooter with awesome graphics you get over it quickly and realize it's not that great a game.
I know we're just 6 episodes in, but I think most people can instinctively and rather quickly tell whether a show has something genuine to offer or is hiding behind types and cliches or novelty and shock value to impress. And I think there's really alot that can be done with the basic idea here.
Well that turned out to be longer than I expected. I realize I'm not the one with the actual responsibility of putting a series together and presenting it to an audience, and reading back I recognize I'm being pretty pretentious and getting worked up over a cartoon. Still, a better series would be better for all of us, and I hope someone finds something of value in my rant.
Anybody else thinking along these lines?
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to catch this. It is turning out to be a pretty good series BUT some things need to change. The animated before a live studio audience, like someone mentioned, has been used already. Another pet peeve is the strung out opening credits; I know you have to give everyone credit, just do it after the cartoon. And one last thing, this is a furry show. Those characters are anthropomorphic dogs so its a furry show. But who cares because it is actually getting good now.
Was the trap thing intended to be an homage to UR?
Because it kind of came off as a blatant rip off.
Because it kind of came off as a blatant rip off.
There's something wrong with me, I can't stop clicking the link even though I know it's going to suck hard.
How many shows have done the D&D thing? Some were ONLY that, like Unforgotten Realms and yet this show had to go there... and not even do anything original. This was literally the Dead Alewives sketch with dogs. The girl who's new, the annoying guy... common guys, this is bordering on plagiarism.
At least this time I didn't finish the episode.
How many shows have done the D&D thing? Some were ONLY that, like Unforgotten Realms and yet this show had to go there... and not even do anything original. This was literally the Dead Alewives sketch with dogs. The girl who's new, the annoying guy... common guys, this is bordering on plagiarism.
At least this time I didn't finish the episode.