Wulfgar Von Heltzer

The whole name change thing was pointless, the name just meant she was an idiot, it wasn't insulting towards people who are mentally challenged. Honestly, anyone who seriously offended must be extremely insecure. Or you're looking for something to complain about.

Anyway, Muffins is......eh. Could be worse, but they really should've just kept it as Derpy. I doubt a bunch of overly-sensitive retards who can't tell the difference between a silly name and an actual insult towards a group of people, and narcissists who exist for the sole purpose of "saving the day" for the sake of further padding their own egos,would've managed to actually harm Hasbro in anyway, so no, it wasn't reasonable for them to have caved in to the demands of those goofs.

And tho I have a feeling they would've likely launched smear campaigns against Hasbro if they didn't change the name, I think it's safe to say that Hasbro is big enough with enough money to have just shrugged it off.

Just me 0.02 shekels.

The writing of the show could be improved I think. I miss the days of seasons 1+2 where i enjoyed the episodes more and how i could replay them again and again. I do find a lot more flaws since season 3 and i hate the direction of Equestria Girls. Now should i invest my time in pointing out the flaws of the show (one aimed again for a younger audience and NOT adults?) as my contribution to the fandom? Or should we work on celebrating what we LIKE about the show and the fandom?

I don't see it as a waste of time to point out flaws, you shouldn't ignore the negatives. If there's a serious problem with the show's writing, then that needs to be pointed out. Focus on the good AND the bad.

Some people are definitely over-critical, but I think some bronies just can't handle any critique of the show they love. One thing I've heard more than once is that analysts ruin the show for people, the only way that could be true is if they caused them to see actual glaring issues that they had previously not noticed, and those issues were so severe they caused them to want to stop watching. But that's not really the analysts fault for pointing out those problems, it's the problems themselves.

I think a lot of bronies just want to keep enjoying the show, and they'd rather ignore serious problems in the writing so as not to have to accept that maybe it just isn't that well-written after all. But that just proves you care about quality storytelling. If you were so adamant on ignoring flaws in the writing, or didn't even care and just watched the show for mindless entertainment, than you wouldn't be watching or reading mlp analyzing..

Which just tells me that some of you are just really insecure and can't handle any criticisms of this show. Well, those who dislike the analyst community as a whole that is, and not just the overly critical ones.

That's what most of us want, my friend, no need to use the royal Capslock.

Sorry, I kinda rambled a bit there. But yeah, I don't believe it has anything to do with hatred of females, I think there are just certain expectations of men in western society. Men are expected be to strong, and women are allowed to be weak, so a weak man is seen as feminine and therefore that's seen as a bad thing. But weakness in general is bad.

That, and there are just certain things a lot of people see as girly, like MLP, and the color pink, and people who deviate from the norm and like things that is perceived to be abnormal for them to like, will get ridiculed for acting differently.

So I think that's all I have to say, yeah.

No, but I've seen a (I suppose famous), news reporter before. Didn't say anything to him, because who cares? Just because someone is famous doesn't mean they deserve to be revered. They're just famous. I don't understand this culture of celebrity worship, if you're gonna respect someone, it should be because of the kind of person they are, not because they sung a song, or acted in some movie. They're no more special than anybody else.

@@Wulfgar Von Heltzer,

 

I actually agree with you and Silver to different extents.

 

Yes, men and women are just different. Gender certainly does inform personality to a great extent.

 

I only disagree in that I don't think it's the final word on identity and that outliers always happen. 

No, there are exceptions to the rule, but yes, you shouldn't force people to be something they aren't. So how bout we just let people do and be who they truly are, as long as they aren't hurting anybody or anything, and people who want to everyone into specific roles they don't need to or want to be in, as well as SJW marxists. who oppose stereotypical gender and racial roles, but believe there needs to be an equal amount of every race and gender in every single field of work or hobby, even tho that's absolute insanity and can never realistically work, so they wanna force specific races and genders in and out of certain fields just to attain their deranged utopia of forced equality, can just fuck right off?

How bout that? Just let people be who the fuck they are.

Just a random question out of curiosity.  Have you ever been in a real fist fight with someone?  And how did it all happen and such?

I've been in one, but it was before I knew kickboxing so it was just a stupid looking haymaker war... I was in 8th grade so I was an idiot 

I'd also like to know your thoughts on people fighting.  Is it necessary or not?

(btw please don't say names)

Beyond fights with one of my siblings, not much. There was this one time where, during 6th grade, some 4 or 5th grader (kids from those grade were strangely short, I recall) took my backpack and threw it in a puddle. Naturally, I took his backpack and threw it in a puddle.

This led to a fight between me and a bunch of his friends. I managed to hold to short little fucktards off for a while, even managed to grab one by the shirt and slammed him against a metal door. I remember him having a big bruise on his back after that. It ended with one girl I know, for reasons I still have not figured out, poking me in the eyes, than all the kids jumped me simultaneously while I was stunned, but then the bell rang so I was sparred a heavy beating.

None of us were suspended tho. There was also some kid, tho I don't remember why, but I'm pretty damn sure he started it, I threw his bag on the ground hard, then he went berserk, chewing on my arm, and I had to seriously beat him off. I later learned that he went into shock after he was subdued I guess. Apparently, his laptop was in there, so that was why. Understandable that he'd be so upset. I got in trouble for fighting back, I asked the principle "what was I supposed to do, let him chew my arm while I drag him to your office?" and she basically said yes.

Another kid at that same school, whom showed up partway through the year from some other school, quickly got into a beef with me and we had some sort of fight, verbal or physical, but we quickly got along......somehow. Never really friends, tho.

There was this one racist asswipe he, through high school, consistently pissed me off, until one day, after he mocked me, I threw a chair at him. Naturally I was kicked out of class, for the day I think. No regrets.

I'm sure I have more fight stories but that's all I feel like typing about right now.

I do wish I was still in school tho, if only so that I could smash some more pricks. I really do itch for an excuse to beat up some bullies up again. But my vidya gives me an outlet for my violent urges, fortunately.

Because western society often denounces feminism and females in general. It is anti-woman. Males are taught that it is the ultimate insult to be compared to a female. "Don't be a girl/that's for girls" is a simplistic version of the insult thrown by children to reinforce the dominion of males in society and to shun those males that do not conform.

Yeah I'm gonna need a citation on that one, in regards to it having to do with anti-women.

 

The trend seems to be that the situation is slowly getting better, but there are still so many people who believe that the traditional gender roles are "set in stone" or "just natural" or something like that.

They're ignorant. Gender is learned and it is something that can be unlearned.

There are, apparently, actual legitimate natural differences between males and females in terms of general interests, etc. While I'm sure there is some stereotyping going on, it doesn't mean that boys and girls are exactly alike, that there's no difference between their regular interests. You cannot force people to change what they like, who  they are.

Honestly, as far as I'm aware, the "dislike" of feminine males is more about certain expectations of men in western society, and ridicule may occur if a male fails to meet those expectations, or just acts abnormal for their gender. Misogyny is irrelevant.

And no I'm not going to expect anyone of you to take my word for it until I can be assed to dig up some trustworthy studies on the subject matter. Or you can educate yourselves, alternatively.

Wow, I didn't think it'd be possible for me to have an even lower opinion of Fish if this turns out to be true. If it is true, then I never want to touch Fez again, or anything he's associated with

Well he's certainly not making any more games, he rage-quit the industry back in august or september, cancelling Fez 2, and tried to sell the IP. and is now a DJ.

No wonder he cancelled Fez 2, he can't make the game himself and likely pissed off anyone who would be willing to help him.

According to a former video game journalist, Allistair Pinsof, Phil fish effectively stole coding to make fez, never gave credit, then used his connections in the industry to intimidate the developers into not suing him : (For some reason the thread isn't loading right now so here's the archive: https://archive.today/C9737)

You hear a lot of things when you become a journalist prominent enough to cover big exclusives but not popular enough to be initiated into the game media elite’s inner circle. One of the more interesting things I heard was a notable indie developer tell me that Phil Fish significantly stole from their code, projects and ideas to create Fez. When I questioned why they won’t sue, they said they were in fear of being ostracized by the IGF, media, and indie dev scene.

 

I don’t mind naming this developer because most of the information is in fact public, just ignored by the media. So, this developer Shawn McGrath approached me when Indie Game: The Movie came out and featured credits that libeled his friend Jason Degroot. Both of these guys were extremely influential on Fez; there’s a good argument that it’s their game. McGrath created the central mechanic, design, and code which was lifted from an earlier project he made with Fish that was a music game. Fish admitted to this as far back as 2007, but he’d say “the whole game is made around the 3D pixel aesthetic” or “it’s all designed around my Miyazaki influence”. This was dishonest however because it was really designed around McGrath’s mechanic.

 

Let me roll back a little here. Degroot did music for Fez in 2007. He had a falling out with Fish which led to legal threats and drama which you can find in Indie Game: The Movie (which by coincidence was produced by Fish’s current partner, hmm). The film presents him as an ominous entity who exists to make Fish’s life hell, never was he given a chance to tell his side of the story, and — a total slap in the face — the film’s credits said he “asked not to participate in the film” which was untrue. Degroot is a non-confrontational guy so McGrath took up his cause — feeling sympathy since Fish stole from him too and backstabbed him — and came to me with his story. So, let me get back to that.

 

The thing the public never knew – that McGrath and Degroot held for leverage should the filmmakers & Fish not change the credits – is that McGrath worked on Fez until the GDC trailer put out in October 2007, according to McGrath. At this point, McGrath had a second falling out and this time it was serious. McGrath told him they were done and Fish agreed to cancel the project. The agreement was that McGrath would take his original design (2D/3D rotating mechanic) and Fish would take his Trixel engine, according to McGrath. When McGrath saw the game appear at IGF 2008, he was furious and felt backstabbed. There’s been bad blood between them ever since. This behavior seems habit for Fish since the same thing happened to Degroot who designed the game’s original audio aesthetic via sound effects and a chiptune score, only to be cut and suddenly replaced with someone else who copied his style — it’s an amazing soundtrack but Fish keeps bringing in new people to follow through on other people’s ideas.

 

I think Fish is a talented visual designer and Fez carries his unique stamp on it, but the problem — and this is according to McGrath — remains that two of its biggest creators were snubbed out of its development, uncredited, unpaid, stolen from, and lied to. What makes this an industry wide problem is that the two were afraid to speak out because of Fish’s connections. Fish was friends with Boyer who ran the IGF, Fish was a social butterfly who knew a lot of gaming press (there were multiple videos of him casually hanging out with 1UP staff back on their video site in 2008) and had high level connections at Microsoft. Degroot & McGrath feared Fish would use his connections to ruin their career right as they were to debut their successful indie title Dyad.

 

I feel like this story embodies the indie game development scene as a whole. You have guys like Degroot and McGrath who are non-confrontational, good people who just want to make a great game. Then you have these megalomaniacs who use their influence to cheat their way into awards, take ideas and more from other developers, and depend on media, investor, and judge connections to keep their corruption away from the public’s eye.

I already disliked the guy, and, if this is true, I now have further reason to hate him. I hope, assuming this actually happened, that they gain the courage to sue. He shouldn't be able to get away with this.

When I worked at Best Buy, we sold Ouyas. Problem was, we had two of them for sale. We sold 1 after 5 months.

Those things were actually in stores? I've literally never seen one.

My eating schedule is too strict, I don't have anything after dinner anymore, so no midnight snacks . Gotta maintain my weight.

Isn't Ouya dead? I'm pretty sure Ouya's dead.

Ouya? MORE LIKE : BOOOOOOOOOOO-ya

Wouldn't be how I would spend my disposable income either, but how people want to spend their money is their business. If people want to send a youtuber they like to a con, they should be able to without worrying whether it was "legitimate" or not.

 

 

One could also argue that you're making a lot of assumptions about a person you don't know. I not a subscriber to this person, I don't know what her financial situation is like. Assuming that shes some kind of manipulative dick based on so little information is kind of lame.

Exactly, if you don't know whether or not she legitimately can't afford it, you're taking a foolish risk, and for something as pointless as a convention. I never said she definitely tried to manipulate people into giving her money, nor am I saying she was scamming people, all I'm saying is that it's a possibility.

If you want to toss your money at some person on the internet who could easily be lying about needing it, than go ahead. I'll have absolutely zero sympathy for you if you wind up getting scammed.

Have problem with people wanting to go to Cons, kindly ask for donate and people donated. I know you have your opition. I don't think she ask people to don't donated to charity but to her. I see people do that. I think some bronies do help each other. Do you dislike her?

She didn't outright say don't give to charity, but if you're gonna donate your disposable income to anything, it should be something legitimate. Something not pointless. I dislike it when people e-beg for money to buy things they don't need. She should've just accepted that she and her dad wouldn't be able to go that year.

One could argue that she had the money already but decided it'd be more intelligent just to e-bag to scam people for 2k. 

You could say that she was deliberately attempting to emotionally manipulate people to donate with her little sob story about how much it means to her to go. There are so many vapid individuals who are easily trolled by cute girls on the internet begging them for shit. She's also a youtuber with a pre-existing fanbase, so there's the possibility of fans who would blindly believe anything she says, because of the mental-disorder known as fanboyism that seems to be present in ANY fandom.

There's a good chance she was aware of this, and use it to her advantage. If it really was a con-job, welp, successful scam was successful.

Of course, it's possible that she's just a spoiled brat who really wasn't able to go that year without the donated money and just can't handle not getting what she wants so she resorts to e-begging.

Anyone who donated was a fool. And no, that's not an insult. If you're daft you're daft. But it happened anyway, so oh well.

InkRose

I was gonna give Inkrose a chance, than I looked through her vids and found her begging for money to go to bronycon.

No reason as to why anyone should, just that "I REALLY want to go there this year!". It was like, 2 grand I think, for fuck's sakes (for her and her father). No proof that she couldn't afford it herself, either. Makes it seem to me like she's a spoiled little brat who can't handle not getting want she wants.

"Don't donate that money to charity, or put to use for some other good cause, donate it to ME so I can go to a convention!" Fuck right off. I've never even gone to a convention and I've never, and will never, beg for money for something unnecessary like that. She later made a vid saying people could get rewards for donating, but this was AFTER the first video, and people had called her out for pointless e-begging.

Unfortunately, it was fully-funded. For some reason. Shame on anyone actually donated.

Pretty sure I started a Zoe Quinn thread between 2 and 3 months ago. Anyone remember when it was just her under the spotlight, I look back at those simpler days with nostalgia.

I saw that one the other day, I was gonna post there, but noticed that it hadn't gotten any more posts since september, so I figured this site wasn't interested in the topic. I wanted to make a thread that explains the issue to people, but couldn't be assed to go through the mountain of info to make a compilation. Then I found this video, which did the work for me

Anywho, there's a stream going on with KingofPol, a gamergate supporter who's been doing many many streams since this started, and has had other pro-gamergate folk and game devs on to discuss. Anti-gamergate, unsurprisingly, has avoided joining in, to my knowledge, except for one guy named Koz, who, even tho he SEEMED like he was getting it after the last stream he was in, seemingly went full-blown anti-gamergate again at some point. Don't know if he's regained some sense, but I doubt. Probably a lost cause, honestly.

Anyway, here's the stream:

http://www.hitbox.tv/kingofpol

He's currently taking a brief break tho.

 

While I acknowledge that there are many who use the "Gamergate" label as a flag for ethical journalism in gaming, this comment I found on the gaming site Polygon sums up my thoughts fairly well:

 

"The problem is that when an activist group is defined entirely by its amorphous, anonymous nature, it's impossible to hold it accountable for anything, because everyone's reasons for being part of it are different.

 

You see it in people's reaction to anti-GG people already – 'GamerGate isn't about THAT, it's about THIS!'. Everybody passes the buck constantly, and nobody is willing to admit that the ship is sinking.

 

As long as GamerGate – or its successor – is populated and piloted primarily by the anonymous masses of the internet within Reddit and the chans while additional hangers-on join via Twitter, it's going to be impossible to make any progress because there's just not enough cohesion to the whole group. It's like a hydra. Too many heads, not focused on any one thing so they keep biting each other instead of attacking their prey."

 

This inherent conflict of the Gamergate "movement" is entirely relevant to any discussion of it, and if people using the label don't acknowledge that they are just as bad as the people who believe everyone involved with it are misogynists.

 

How is the ship sinking? We're kicking their corrupt asses across the field, stripping their advertisers. The movement IS focused, overall, on ethical reform for video game journalism. There's nobody in full command giving out orders to the entire movement, but that's GOOD, if anything, because without leader's, we can't be co-opted.

Any doing things the way we are now, a multi-headed hydra, has proven successful thus far, so there's no reason to change tactics now.

Did you even read my post? I never said the goal was debatable, I said that it's a matter rooted in politics and controversy, and that it in itself was going to stir up debate.

 

Journalism ethics in itself is already a controversial issue. Then when you conflate it with game journos being in bed (literally) with SJWs and Radfems, the only conceivable outcome is extreme controversy.

Well, yes it's a controversial topic. Still, the name Debate Pit implies, well, debate. This isn't one, tho, so I don't agree that it belongs there. That, and 100 character limit is annoying.

I'm not going over this any further, if people want to discuss the topic, cool, if not, please leave, I don't like derails.

The debate pit is for controversial topics. And whether or not GG's goal is up for debate, it's still a matter of controversy. Even before we get into all of the he-said-she-said regarding the facts of the matter, it's still a topic deeply related to social justice politics and radical feminism. These are issues that incite alot of controversy.

 

And since you yourself are saying that you do not wish for this thread to be a "hugbox," doesn't that mean you are welcoming controversial discussion or...

 

[pause for effect]

 

...debate?

 

I'm all for that sort of discussion, but let us label it properly, my good fellow.

It's not up for debate. Gamergate is looking for ethical video game journalism, there is no debate on that part. It has nothing to do with a hatred of women and or minorities in the industry, anyone saying so is misguided or deflecting. I welcome differing opinions, because I don't like hugboxes, but the question of whether or not gamergaters are just wanting ethical video game journalism or are a bunch of a angry cis-white males who just can't stand women is not subjective. It's a proven fact that it's about wanting ethical video game journalism. Yes, there are surely women-haters, but they're the vast minority, and don't represent the movement as a whole.

There's nothing to debate about that part. It's an objective truth so anyone arguing that needs to be properly informed, and if they still argue against it, than they're either trolling, in denial, or insane. Either way, they're not adding anything meaningful to the discussion.

I'm not going any further on that part. You read my post, acknowledge the real facts, or stay out of the discussion, because you may as well be trolling.

Moderators, PLEASE do NOT put this in the debate pit, there is NO debate to be had as to what the real goal of gamergate is. It's a movement wanting ethical reform of the corrupt video game's journalism industry. NOT a sexist group of angry white males. That is a FACT. I want to have a discussion thread (not a hugbox echo-chamber) about gamergate, in regards to what is REALLY going on here.

And yes, I'm aware that there have been other threads on this, but they've gone nowhere. I want to start a new thread with this video that will educate newcomers to what's going on, and discourage people who aren't interested in seeing the reality that this isn't a sexist movement, that we're just fighting for ethical video game journalism.

ANYONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW WHAT GAMERGATE IS OR THINKS IT'S A MISOGYNISTIC MOVEMENT WANTING TO ATTACK WOMAN PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO BELOW OR DO, NOT, POST, or I'll assume you're trolling and report you as such, (and hopefully, the moderators will punish you accordingly). Because if you're willfully refusing to actually acknowledge the facts, you're not contributing anything meaningful to the discussion, and are not welcome.

So let's please discuss Gamergate here, and not the debate pit.

 

You know, assuming they're bad because they mix comedy and horror without even watching/playing any of them is like judging a book by its cover. Also, you want good of mix of comedy and horror. Look no closer to Courage the Cowardly Dog.

I assume it's bad because I know you shouldn't mix comedy in a story that's mean to be scary, it destroys the mood completely. Why would you even want to add humor to a horror? I'm talking Silent Hill type here, would you honestly think that comedy would be a good idea at all in such a story? If you're writing a horror story that's based on a feeling of suspense, eeriness, and terror, all comedy would do is break any feeling of that, and for what purpose? What does it add, besides shattering the mood? That would just ruin it.

I'm sorry, but I stand by what I said.

Anyone remember in Full metal alchemist when that little girl is crying " Why are they putting my daddy in the ground, why are they putting all that dirt on daddy?" " If they bury him, he wont be able to do all his work!" "No! He has a lot of work to do! Stop putting dirt on my daddy! DAADDYYYY!!"

 

It needs to GO there. Just like Full metal Alchemist did. 

Again, why would something like this be a good idea? Why do so many people want the show to go in a direction like this? It'd be too jarring to suddenly change the tone this far in, and the character designs are far too silly looking to be taken seriously (plus, the names don't help: Pinkie Pie, Rainbow Dash, Fluttershy, etc.). Like just picture that scene you described with MLP characters, could you honestly watch that with a straight face?

The want for a darker, edgier, more mature MLP is a silly idea that would never work and people should stop pushing for it.

Poltergeist , Evil Dead 2, Nightmare on Elm Street, Gremlins. 

I haven't watched/played any of those but I'm just going to assume they're bad if they're trying to mix comedy and horror. Unless you consider jump-scares to be good horror. I don't. A legitimate horror story/game has a consistent mood of dread, suspense, eeriness, and occasional terror. You must to maintain that air. If, at ANY point, anything humorous happens (either intentional or unintentional), that mood is gone, and you're never getting it back. All you can do after that is rely on jump scares, which won't salvage it.

@@Wulfgar Von Heltzer, Actually, the one who needs to learn what dark means is yourself, because your viewpoint of dark is narrow and stereotypical. Darkness in a show isn't exclusive to the topics you listed. "Dark" also means how the writers address certain issues.

 

Let's take a look at some I listed.

1. Party of One: Pinkie becomes lost, crazy, and depressed, and the way she addresses it is very creepy. How? The color is very bleak. Pinkie's eyes cross quite a bit. The background changes and sometimes becomes surreal. She talks to imaginary rock friends, and none of what she says make any sense.
2. Lesson Zero: A perfect example of dark comedy. The creepy imagery of Twilight being laughed at. Twilight's crazy faces throughout the episode. Plenty of Ponyville fighting for Smarty-Pants. A lot of this was done for humor, but executed sensitively to not make it mocking.
3. A Bird in the Hoof: No matter how much you slice it, it doesn't change the fact that Philomena's death is dark. How? Because the mood suddenly changed and wasn't innocent anymore. It wasn't long, but it is a dark moment.
4. Magical Mystery Cure: The ReMane Five's whole livelihoods had their lives switched. Whatever they knew about themselves the day before was gone because their lives were supposedly fixated on their cutie mark. As a result, everyone's lives became miserable. Twilight felt very guilty. Sweet Apple Acres became barren. Ponyville bickered at Fluttershy's expense. Applejack closed up shop. Rainbow Dash and Rarity felt hopeless. What was bright and cheerful turned sad, overcast, and gray to symbolize the tone change.

And two other examples:

1. Twilight's Kingdom: @ alluded to this, and I'll exemplify one instance. Tirek destroyed her home, and the whole mood changed. What was once bright and comical with some danger on the side became bleak, red, and urgent. The stakes escalated very quickly.
2. The Crystal Empire: One big moment was after Twilight opened the door. Twilight's biggest fear came true. Even though it was only an illusion, the tone felt very real.

Don't put words in my mouth. What I'm saying is you claim the show is silly and innocent. While that's true, it's ridiculous to claim the show hasn't had serious/dark moments. They're not be at the scale compared to other shows, but it doesn't change the fact that they're there.

Well I hardly see that as dark. When I think of dark, I think of mature themes, stuff you wouldn't put in a kids show. The things you mentioned are so tame that they don't break the mood of the show. Honestly, they don't even phase me. And that's why they were able to get away with adding those moments.They're darker than usual, but barely. Just barely.

And while yes, the show has it's serious moments, rarely has it gone super serious like in Hurricane Fluttershy. It mixes in serious moments with silly, it manages to balance it by almost never being too serious. So to answer the question of the thread, MLP is dark enough, anymore would be a bad idea. It get's it just right (well, except when it pulls a Hurricane Fluttershy, episodes I think shouldn't happen because of the extreme shift in mood

Ever read Hamlet, Stranger in a Strange Land, the Good Earth, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Stand? 

Ever seen Full Metal Jacket & Return of the Jedi?

 

A masterpiece can have conflicting moods. 

If you want comedy in a serious story, you shouldn't go very far with the seriousness. I think in order for that to work, it needs to balance it. There's a point where it's too serious and you can't throw in comedy without it being jarring. Horror, on the other hand? Never, ever have humor in a horror, for they rely on being consistently suspenseful in order to be scary. Comedy completely obliterates that.

No, because it's too much of a mood-breaker for mlp's lighthearted, comedy theme. Why do people keep pushing for a darker MLP? Why does anyone think that would be a good idea?

Also, and this is a Season Five Spoiler

 

 

It has been confirmed that we will have an episode regarding the emotional fallout of Twilight losing her home. This is likely the sad story MA Larson said he hated having to write

 

 

There is your death story. Symbolism is great for adults and so much deeper and emotional in this artists opinion. 

Kinda impossible for it to be sad when she already has a replacement home (a bigger and better one, too), before the episode even begins. Unless it's supposed to be sad because of the memories she had from living there, but eh. Not really sad enough to even bother with, and they shouldn't be trying to have that that kind of stuff in the series anyway, because mood-breaker.

FIM may be silly, but it's not as innocent as you or everyone else here thinks. There have been so many moments where FIM's tone shifted towards dark, quality notwithstanding.

1. A Bird in the Hoof: Philomena catching fire.
2. Party of One: Pinkie becoming crazy and depressed at the end of Act 2 and deep into Act 3.
3. Return of Harmony: Twilight losing her color and quitting her fight for harmony and friendship.
4. Lesson Zero: Twilight's whole ordeal is black comedy through and through.
5. Hurricane Fluttershy: Fluttershy's imagery of stage fright becoming a crippling phobia.
6. Sleepless in Ponyville: Scootaloo waking up from her nightmare in Act 3.
7. Magical Mystery Cure: During "I've Got to Find a Way," Ponyville turned gray and depressing.
8. Flight to the Finish: Self-explanatory.
9. Rarity Takes Manehattan: Suri's blatant plagiarism greatly impacting Rarity's creative viewpoint and friendship.
10. Testing Testing 1, 2, 3: It may be the funniest episode in season four, but it tackled a very sensitive issue about how people learn differently.

And these are just some examples.

I don't think you understand what dark really is. I'm talking death, murder, horror (actual horror), gore, rape, tragedy, war, genocide, severe mental trauma. All of what you listed are extremely tame, something bad happening does not equal dark, that's called conflict, which is necessary in any story. You may argue that the moment where Philomena bursting into flames and turning to ash was dark, but within moments, she was reborn, preventing it from being a truly dark moment (there wasn't even any blood or gore, or graphic immolation).

Dark would be Death Note, Hannibal Lector, Game of Thrones, etc., Fallout 3, Law and Order, etc. Or, a dark comedy example, the Pony .Mov series (particularly the infamous Shed.mov). Tho MLP occasionally takes a darker than usual route, it never, at any point, goes all the way with it.

I know you're arguing in support of a darker MLP, but you and everyone else who want that SERIOUSLY need to understand that ANY good story cannot have conflicting moods going on. Some work together, others don't. You can't have a serious story and then suddenly throw some comedy in there, or have comedy in a horror or sad story. MLP could only have dark if it was a comedy (because of the existence of black humor), based on the silly looking character designs that make it impossible to take seriously. But even then, it would've had to have started out that way. Because of the fact that it didn't, you can't suddenly change the mood of a series without it being too jarring to the audience.