I would have loved to see the tombstone ... and Dudley's conduct too.
#2
Anonymous
Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:24:14
"The comic proves to me, once again, why reference based "jokes" are so deceptive: people get amusement from recognizing the reference, and they confuse this amusement with actual humor, which it is not." - Carl Wheeler on xkcd #754, xkcdsucks.blogspot.com
Right, the reference in this comic isn't funny. Hence its ratings. But Mr. xkcdsucks's principle is wrong; if a reference is amusing, then people are amused by it, and it's silly to lecture them about how they shouldn't be amused by it and are mistaking it for real humor. In this case the reference wasn't particularly amusing, because it wasn't done well, but in the comic he was talking about, it was done well, which is why it was amusing. (In fact it was the only decent xkcd strip this month, which is why he had to come up with a lame reason for saying it sucked.)
the problem with xkcdsucks is that it's built upon its premise, so they have to take shots at every xkcd comic whether or not it's a good one. i fully admit that xkcd is not nearly as good as it used to be, but that doesn't mean every single comic sucks.
Well, at least they honestly call themselves xkcdsucks, rather than something like XKCD News or something.
#12
Anonymous
Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:32:52
Well, Carl does admit to liking a strip from time to time, but I guess he is somewhat predisposed to hate even the average ones. Slandor: Yeah, I guess you're right, except for one thing. I don't believe there is anything like an "amusing reference". Yes, a reference may be amusing, but it requires context. Without that, it's just a reference. It's only shouting "Thriller by Michael Jackson" and hoping someone laughs.
I kind of agree with that xkcdsucks line... but not when it comes to Dudley. Trying to find a good or interesting way to render a reference in the nethack world is a lot more interesting to me than the usual "just a reference" you get from a webcomic. This particular strip isn't the best example, but oh well.
The recursion joke, while classic, is pretty simple and barren in its abstractness. The dependencies joke is clearly an expression of frustration, probably brought about by a recent personal experience of the author. I suppose that the recursion joke may have originated that way too, but now that it has been stripped down to its bare essentials, it is about as funny as why the chicken crossed the road.
Last edited: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 18:17:30
#18
Anonymous
Sat, 26 Jun 2010 01:53:34
I'd probably have liked this strip if I had gotten the reference.
Also, my CAPTCHA question was "What symbol represents a zombie?"
28 Comments
...this one was M, though. Panel 2 text should probably be "You're paralyzed" or something like that.
on topic: this one is not very good.
Slandor: Yeah, I guess you're right, except for one thing. I don't believe there is anything like an "amusing reference". Yes, a reference may be amusing, but it requires context. Without that, it's just a reference. It's only shouting "Thriller by Michael Jackson" and hoping someone laughs.
recursion: n. See recursion.
ThinkGeek's recursive T-shirt does it second-best:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/itdepartment/b2ae/
Reference jokes are only amusing if there's some slight send-up involved.
The recursion joke, while classic, is pretty simple and barren in its abstractness. The dependencies joke is clearly an expression of frustration, probably brought about by a recent personal experience of the author. I suppose that the recursion joke may have originated that way too, but now that it has been stripped down to its bare essentials, it is about as funny as why the chicken crossed the road.
Also, my CAPTCHA question was "What symbol represents a zombie?"