Is it wrong to pander?
I think so. I feel like fan service in any form degrades the medium as a whole.
For example, a lot of people think moeshit=all anime because it makes many, and the art form suffers for it. So there are a lot of people who won't give the entire medium a chance because of a stupid fucking minority.
Only when it's to the lowest common denominator?
Yes, why else do you people complain about moeshit and haremshit in anime.
If want to tell a message you need subtly, if you just want make money you pander and make it as obvious as a brick to the head
>>81622364
It depends, I guess?
I think it hurts when a writer lets pandering change their initial vision of their work. A story shouldn't be treated as a democracy, changing at the whims of the fans, but at the same time writers can respond to critique and expand on ideas that seemed to resonate with people.
And considering that Adventure Time apparently never had an end goal planned out for characters, the writers are more free to shift focus to things that fans wanted to see more of. How that shift in focus turns out is subjective.
It's only really pandering when you're able to just sort of "tell" that the only reason something was done was because the creator knows fans will just eat it up.
If someone happens to do something that the fans enjoy that's not pandering and if the creator truly likes something put forth by the fans and can seamlessly incorporate it into the story without someone being able to see it as pandering then I guess it's alright even if it technically is such.
The important thing about pandering is that it's something that the creator clearly isn't passionate about or had planned to include in the story but was put in because people wanted it. There's a difference between "I as a creator like the same shit my fans like and want them to enjoy what I give them" and "they want this so take it".
>>81622364
yes
>>81623568
I like this one the most so far.
Also I think a big thing is that media now encourage fans and creators to be a LOT closer than they were before and that can breed awkward situations. Social media, blogs, behind-the-scenes videos, cons, clickbait, etc etc. Now all creators have twitter accounts and interact with fans more, but it's a false closeness. Just because I watch and enjoy a program and the creator reblogs my fan-video doesn't mean that the showrunner and I are friends, or that the showrunner should feel obligated to do things I want. Equally just because a showrunner does something I hate doesn't mean they are personally spiting me. Yet so often people seem to feel that way.
Remember: It's only pandering if it's towards things I don't like.
>>81622364
Wouldn't say "wrong," but it's usually shallow.
>>81622364
Only when it's not something I like.
Only if it doesn't pander to me
>Any gay characters that don't announce their gayness off the bat is pandering.
/co/'s inability to understand homosexuality will always be pathetic.
>>81624987
fuck off literal fag
>>81622364
Yes.
If you're not a hack, you should be fine telling your own fucking story. None of that probing what the audience wants and spoonfeeding them. The audience doesn't know what it wants. You're supposed to give them something they didn't know they wanted.
>>81624987
It's less about them being gay and more about there being a dozen episodes focusing on their homolust and past when the show is supposed to be about Finn. When you take into account how popular Bubbline is in the fandom it becomes clear that they're doing it for the fans.
>>81622364
Actually yes, yes it is.
Never pander. Consider expectations and use them well or in a twist sure, but never ever pander. It reeks of desperation and everybody can see it.
>>81622364
> AT
we're gonna need a new episode thread.
>>81622364
yeah, their endangered
>>81625815
>when the show is supposed to be about Finn
Oh snap, a show not completely focused on a dude 24/7? What a crime.
>>81625815
Dude the show is still like 75% focused on Finn, that's not the problem.
The problem is that they keep milking Bubbline while being too pussy to come out and say they were an item so all they're doing is pissing off the fans of the ship because it's not canon and pissing off the haters of the ship because it keeps getting episodes based around it.
Show makers are lil pussies who should come out and say it or stop milking it over and over.
>>81624987
It is pandering since in this day in age it can be seen as "normalizing" and "pushing". And truthfully half the time is to pull in ratings to look "progressive".
>>81627727
God the next Episode of them is Pb helping Marcy write a song.
>>81622364
I think the line between creator and fan influence should generally be less permeable.
>>81622364
There's a world of difference between creators seeing fans responding to something already present in the show and naturally building off it because they realize its potential, and creators literally just imitating "fanon" creations because they know there's a built-in audience for it.
Even back in the '90s creators were aware of internet fandoms to some extent, and subsequently responding to/referencing them in-show, in some form or another, is nothing new. But literally attempting to please a bunch of teenagers/manchildren who may not even be your target audience, almost always sucks.
I feel like most MLP shit is in the second category, to name probably the most prominent recent example.
Not if it panders to me, but if not it's an horrible mistake
It is absolutely wrong to pander. Every time a creator starts to give into fan complaints they all come out of the woodwork and creators end up ruining their creations trying to please the loudest minority.
>>81622364
No it's not.
>I feel like fan service in any form degrades the medium as a whole.
It doesn't. It's bad when it pander and it doesn't fit into the narrative, but then the issue is bad writing, not pandering.
Fanservice has always existed and Not doing something because it might pander, despite resulting in good story telling IS what is wrong and IS bad writing.
Pandering has never been a valid complain. at worst, it's incidental to the actual cause of badness of a story.
>>81624987
Why does gayness or straightness have to be announced in the first place?
>>81622434
>minority
non-moe shit is the minority are you drunk
>>81622364
Generally yes. There is audience awareness and then there is pandering. There are acceptable levels between the two but generally when the audience seems to be exclusively discussing one aspect of the show, say a lesbian couple, because it was put there to entice those viewers specifically. For the sake of ratings.
Sometimes, a show will catch wind that their lesbian couple is catching more attention, and will change their show to focus on their lesbian couple. This will result in a different show that will leave the audience watching the original show confused and heart broken.
For example, the show Adventure Time was once about a boy and his dog solving mysteries, exploring dungeons, and occasionally pining for some unrequited love. It is now about the journey of a lonely lesbian trying to find bae named____Finn____.
>>81622364
Well. Depends on how you define "pandering".
If you are aware of who your audience is and what they want, you can react to that.
Which can lead to an improvement of the show or a worsening, depending on how well this is executed.
Generally, the good kind of responsiveness is taking criticism seriously and doing your thing with that in mind. The bad kind is to take shit aboard in an attempt to please people with an opinion that is not part of the show, thereby virtue-signalling and pissing off everyone with another opinion on that topic.
Another bad response is to compromise as a reaction to small-group demands.
As a rule of thumb, if a show does something in an attempt to please, that is pandering.
If you can tell without being deeply into the topic, that is bad pandering.
>>81622364
no, people just like to whine about everything.
>>81622364
Pandering is always wrong, but it's not pandering if the creators are sincere about their beliefs.
If it's something that falls in line with what the creator wants and they can actually have it make sense, then no.
If it's something the creator doesn't want, or doesn't care about but does it anyway because the fans want it without even considering if it would really work, then yes.
