why? bc i was thinking about what i watch and what i'd like to see from dan, basically what you said to the previous anon. in late 2018 (at the end of the dan and phil era coincidentally) my taste shifted a lot from mostly comedy and vloggers to video essays and comentary so personally i'd love to see something like that from dan, but i have no idea what dan wants to do. what do you think he wants to do? what's something he'll find fulfilling and sustainable?
i'm going insane reading all these asks about what's next for dan's career. i lobe him i want him to succeed, i want him to get attention and i want to be entertained by him <3
me 🤝 you
sustainable? this is UNSUSTAINABLE!! (sorry, the last promo got in the eyes).
i think he wants (or wanted before wad) to get into stand-up comedy. at some point he proclaimed himself a comedian and started acting like one. unsuccessfully, in my opinion. he is a bad actor, but he is good at exaggerating his feelings. and this is why wad show worked for those who were familiar with Dan, his content, his internet personality and the phandom. i think he loves attention from real life audience, and he loves connecting to the audience while being on stage, so audience participation is an important part of what he wants. (let's count how many times i say "audience"). a not-so-strict script that allows to ask questions, react to answers, comment on people's reactions, make faces, laugh randomly, adjust the show to what is happening on stage – that's a stand-up show that hundreds of people are doing. and i think Dan would be very fucking good at it. the problem is the theme of said stand-up. and i think Dan would love for it to not rely on youtube as heavily as it did during wad (which wasn't an actual stand-up comedy).
remember the last vidcon he attended and the panel that felt like a Ted Talk? it was a fail, i'd say. partly because the audience was too diverse in a sense that phannies weren't the majority. and i'm glad he didn't push this type of career path. wad was so much better, but it was also targeted at the people who already knew him. even if in the beginning i think he was trying to get a wider audience, the lack of funding or enthusiasm promo-wise made it impossible for the "outsiders" to make the experience strange for everyone, Dan including. wad happened to be for us. but was it successful or fulfilling, or sustainable? no. not in a money / audience growth / similar future tours ways. there should be done a lot of changes. and i guess completely changing his management was the 1st and very important step. it was fulfilling in a way that he met us, he saw what his coming out did and what an incredible impact he had on us (not to mention that ii was almost the same. a bunch of gays gathered together).
he clearly wants something bigger than we aka phandom can give him. and for that he must change the theme or/and concept of his shows. i do think that he will try to do a performance again. and i hope it's gonna be less acting and more improvisation.
i'm not sure about a filmed show. he sucks as an actor, and i don't want him to fail :( but if Joey Graceffa successfully put out Escape the Night and Liza Koshy had a series that didn't require more acting than her own skits, maybe something similar could be alright?! "danisnotokay" is an outdated title though. we need to change it, he is not 25 anymore, come on.
basically, he loves attention, complaining about his life, trauma dumping, edgy jokes, screaming, laughing, sex jokes, feeling liked, loved and wanted. he fucking beams when people applaud him. and for that he needs audience. he could get all of it minus an applause with a podcast or livestreams, but he is a stubborn asshole, so i do hope to see him on stage again. preferably a smaller one and with new topics to discuss.
16 notes
·
View notes
Playersexuality
It is super annoying when people use the excuse of "playersexual" video game characters to claim characters in video games aren't actually bi/pan, because there is a difference, and it's honestly not that hard to distinguish them!
For an example of a game that is doing playersexual characters who are not textually bisexual, look at Stardew Valley. I love Stardew Valley, but the way it handles sexuality bugs the shit out of me, and always has. If you romance Abigail with a female farmer, she actually mentions having never felt this way about another girl before, so clearly she is not intended to be bisexual. One of the first male romances I did (Sebastian or Elliot?) had a similar line. If you romance Leah, the gender of her ex will always match the farmer's gender, implying that Leah is into that specific gender. (I actually don't mind the Leah implementation of a playersexual character nearly as much as I do the "no homo" in the Abigail romance.)
To contrast that, I think of Dragon Age 2, where all characters are romanceable by any gender Hawke, and they express attraction to a variety of other characters. Anders hits on Hawke the same way regardless of Hawke's gender, and his ex Karl is always a man, while he references having sexual experiences alongside Isabela. Isabela expresses attraction to women (and was willing to have sex with female Wardens in Dragon Age: Origins) as well as men, and will end up in a physical relationship with Fenris if neither character is romanced by Hawke. These feel less like playersexual characters and more like a group of bisexuals hanging out, whether or not that's improbable.
There is a clear difference between a history and textual attraction to multiple genders and the Schroedinger's Ex Leah has. Schroedinger's Ex is less jarring to a player than a line from a character who otherwise reads as queer to a player suddenly saying "I've never had a gay feeling before", but it almost can't be bisexual representation, whereas a character who "no homo"s the player character could reflect or change their mind, representing a more complicated sexuality journey that, while not a particularly common one outside of romance-focused games, is not inherently homo- or bi-phobic.
So seeing people (presumably monosexuals, although it is possible these are bisexuals with internalized shit to work through) look at textually bisexual characters and deride them as playersexual pandering is both confusing and upsetting. There is nothing in the text of, for instance, Baldur's Gate 3, that implies Astarion has any particular surprise or confusion about being attracted to a woman, but some fans will argue that he's too effete to be anything but gay. That's not a gay character turned playersexual for mechanical or marketing convenience, that's fans being homophobic, biphobic, and arguably misogynist and claiming it's the fault of the game developers.
As a gamer who tries to be thoughtfully critical of games, I do think playersexual romances make sense from a marketing and gameplay perspective. I think locking content behind genders or species is a silly thing to do, particularly in a large game that takes a long time to play and is not specifically designed to be played through multiple times like many visual novels and dating sims. I would not count those characters as meaningfully bi or pansexual, even if (as a greedy bisexual) I want to count them as such in my heart. If there's nothing in the text to contradict it, they would really be bi or pan only in headcanon. The playersexual approach of "they're straight except for the very special PC" is problematic, if understandable. It would be less obnoxious in a setting that isn't mired in heteronormativity, because then at least I could believe this is an individual having revelations and new experiences rather than a game dev assuming all people are heterosexual until proven otherwise.
As a bisexual who is very tired of being marginalized by monosexuals, especially queer monosexuals who should know better, I wish people would stop trying to sound progressive and supportive of bisexuals when they are actively erasing and denying the existence of textual bisexuality that they don't understand or which makes them confused or uncomfortable. Even when playersexuality is transparently the reason everyone in the game is bi or pan, singling out the most effeminate men or masculine women and claiming they're "really" monosexuals reveals that the problem is not, in fact, playersexuality, but bisexuality, because it's apparently fine for the straighter-seeming romance options to be bi, but somehow problematic for the obviously queer ones to be.
It's possible some people doing this legitimately think they're helping bisexuals. But critiquing playersexuality should not mean policing the way queer characters act. If the problem is really playersexuality, or the specific implementation of it, then say that, instead of making arguments that are indistinguishable from those a Fox News anchor would make.
17 notes
·
View notes
unpopular opinion…. i don’t like those touchstarved VA’s that have been circulating 😭 i think they’re too gruff and deep for leander and ais. Leander has a smooth voice to me that’s very casual.
and Ais has a very slight gruff but it’s not as intense or deep. it’s kinda crackly but medium in tone.
there’s this voice in my head that’s Mhin to a T, it’s gotta be someone i’ve heard before but i can’t remember!! grouchy for sure
kuras is soft spoken yet authoritative, a bit cheeky in tone, maybe breathy. i think he has those breathy laughs. He speaks clearly though.
vere is the only one i kinda vibe with, being a honeyed sultry voice with some snark.
7 notes
·
View notes