In my case, if the name was something normal, I'd have bought one, because it's exactly the kind of bag I've been looking for, and it appears to be quite well-designed and made. But I've got no particular interest in making a simplistic and somewhat confusing statement about branding everywhere I go.
Ultimately I think it all adds up to the simple fact that in show business, letting your career go backwards even briefly is seen as the mark that it's over.
After he'd sat in as host of the Daily Show (a nearly 20-year-old institution at this point), and not just for one night but for an extended stretch, he simply couldn't go back to being a floating guest star. On top of everything else, it'd be seen as an indication that nobody thought he did a good job in the guest host spot.
But until we are in a place where - without lots of technical skills - you can describe a scene, an environment, a character to a computer and it is generated and you can use it to tell a story, until we are able to completely freely adjust such scenes and plots as a gamemaster in a matter of seconds if our players surprise us (as a your group *always* will sooner rahter than later, no matter how good your preparation), we will remain unable to match the tabletop storytelling with modern media.
I think you are perhaps looking through too narrow a lens of what creativity and storymaking looks like -- because this is very much happening in games. One of the best examples is the ascendancy of Minecraft -- a game where the core engagement is one of creation and construction, not one of reflexes or action. Now I'm not saying people are creating deeply moving literary stories on the fly in Minecraft -- they are mostly just building castles and cities and crazy structures. But the fact that this is the CORE of that game, and that game has been massively adopted by kids and that will change the future of the industry, is just one of many signs pointing towards the expansion of video games into whole new realms.
There are also things like the huge visual novel trend in Japan that is starting to take hold in the west -- mechanically simple games that are easy to create, often using a large amount of stock imagery and settings put together in original ways with all original dialogue (much like a D&D campaign), being churned out (at varying levels of quality, to be sure) by amateurs and professionals alike, with nearly as many people making them as playing them.
There's stuff like the new, excellent adventure games from Telltale (most notably the Walking Dead game), which are exploring the role of the player in storytelling. I think any D&D fan would agree that in a good campaign, everything doesn't just play out linearly the way a DM envisioned -- it branches and changes according to the player choices, so the player has a huge impact on the story. The degree to which that happens in a game like Walking Dead is still limited, but Telltale is aggressively and creatively working on ways to grow that type of meaningful player-as-storyteller interaction (their new The Wolf Among Us series, which just concluded its first season, has introduced substantial new choice mechanics, and there are two more major properties -- Borderlands and Game of Thrones -- being adapted into Telltale games with big resources behind them as we speak).
Lots of interesting storymaking happens in the metagame too. Head over to the Taleworlds Mount & Blade forums, or the Paradox Crusader Kings forums, or the reddits for either of those games. You'll find players who have written extensive tails of their exploits, taking the basic mechanics of play and weaving them into a detailed narrative with all sorts of colour and creativity. Crusader Kings may not let me instantly describe and create any scene I can imagine -- but as I play a dynasty game, guiding a line of rulers through four centuries of European history, forging marriage alliances and staging assassinations and declaring holy wars, I'm writing a story in my head (not to mention being spurred to learn a whole lot about some of the greatest true stories from history).
Obviously I can't debate that storytelling within a computer game is "more limited" than simply "anything you can imagine" the way it ostensibly is with a tabletop game. Though, I played D&D for a while at one point, always as DM, and it is by no means simple or easy -- there's a huge amount of mechanical knowledge and technical skill that goes into creating and running a D&D campaign. If you want to invent your own world or even your own town, you need to spend a lot of time doing calculations and writing down numbers and preparing contingencies and making notes for yourself, all based on information spread throughout multiple long (and expensive) books. And to today's younger pure-digital generation, the barrier of learning some basic LUA scripting, or similar, to expand and mod one of the many games that make modding easy is probably much lower than the barrier of starting to pore through book indices and plot out monster stats on scraps of graph paper.
So while videogame storytelling is still certainly more limited on the surface, I think you might find that what's happening there is more exciting and much further along than you expect.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Right out of the liberal playbook
Still just digging yourself deeper in the hole, I'm afraid.
Shall I quote Limbaugh and other pundits saying how "you can't discuss things with democrats because they are not rational"? Or shall I quote you right now saying you can't talk to the left because of their "false cries" meant to "distract from the issues"?
Those are personal attacks too. Excellent analogues to people who try to derail discussions with accusations of racism or sexism. Meanwhile, at the same time, irrationality and distraction tactics are potentially real issues -- just as racism and sexism are potentially real issues. It's all a matter of perspective, and you are engaging in exactly the behaviour you are trying to condemn, in the same breath as condemning it. I'm glad you showed up really, because nothing could have demonstrated my point better.
No criticism can be made of Obama w/o someone saying you are a racist.
Um, really? I've criticized Obama plenty of times and never been called racist. We've also written articles critical of Obama here on Techdirt and I can't recall a single comment accusing us of racism. So either you're imagining that, or you're only talking to really stupid people.
The right, for the most part, talks issues but the left resorts to personal attacks.
Hahahaha. No. You're doing exactly what we're talking about here -- choosing a "team" and seeing everything through that lens.
Both sides talk about issues, and both sides make personal attacks. But when you have a particular stance on an issue, especially one based on core values, then it's easy to see any discussion of that issue as a personal attack.
When you say Obama is guilty of discrimination, you believe you are talking about issues, whereas democrats are likely to see it as a personal attack. Conversely, when people criticized Romney for being a wealthy elitist, they considered that a discussion of a real issue, whereas republicans saw it as a personal attack.
Neither side wants to actually address what the other side is saying, so they seek out ways to simply invalidate it with one fell swoop, so they can walk away feeling good about themselves. "Oh that's a personal attack, I don't have to respond." It's not a "tactic" of either side -- it's a psychological weakness and a flaw of everyone involved. It's precisely the kind of partisan pitfall the original comment was talking about, and you marched yourself right into it.