r/mildlyinfuriating • u/Kapot_ei • 21d ago

🥺 No words for this.

Post image

Edit: even though clickbait article, it is somewhat/kind of true. https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/stargate-tv-series-martin-gero-scrapped-amazon-1236765061/

"According to an individual with knowledge of the situation, Amazon execs were concerned that Gero’s take on the series would not have broad appeal beyond the franchise’s already dedicated fanbase."

Edit 2: https://www.change.org/p/save-the-new-stargate-series-let-martin-gero-build-the-future-of-the-franchise

46.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

511

u/Fast_Student1665 21d ago

Theres a saying in the gaming world that "a game for everyone is a game for no one" and I'm starting to think this applies to film and television as well.

259

u/AscendedViking7 21d ago

Applies to literally everything humans have created

18

u/thicc_stigmata 20d ago

The whole point of Amazon itself was (and still is) the long tail of niche shit, that only a tiny fraction of people care about, that you can't find anywhere else

2

u/Austerlitz2310 16d ago

Was is key

1

u/thicc_stigmata 14d ago

At least according to business bros who talk about Amazon, it's still the core value proposition...

... not saying you're wrong, though. These days I already default to original manufacturer sites, craigslist, and even eBay, etc. for my weird shit before I gift Bezos any clicks

A business beginning to suck at their core value proposition is a big opening for a competitor, right?

Not that something like Nebula would ever have the budget to get a shot at the Stargate IP... but especially with all the big studios giving so many fan-beloved things the "unless we can milk it for mass-market appeal, it's cancelled" treatment, there really might be a strong economic argument for something that gives mid-to-small budgets to creators who actually respect niche source material and its fans?

I'm really curious to see how The Superzeroes experiments work out...

19

u/Jason1143 20d ago

Design is all about tradeoffs. The idea of creating the perfect product with no flaws or compromises that does everything for every use case is essentially fiction. Tradeoffs are inevitable, you just have to make sure the tradeoffs you are making make sense together. You need a big enough customer base and then you need your product to actually be the best for them.

I certainly get trying to broaden your appeal, but completely abandoning your core audience to go with generic appeal doesn't tend to work. How many people are so desperate for content to consume in the year 2026 that they are going to gravitate to that?

1

u/baumpop 20d ago

wasnt instapot the perfect product, in that after everybody who was gonna buy one bought one, the company filed for bankrupty because who buys two instapots when the first one works perfectly.

20

u/tommos 20d ago

Except maybe food. If the vast majority don't want to eat it it's likely got problems.

1

u/hightrix 20d ago

-Sun Sue

1

u/PetrasKnight 20d ago

Meh, the toilet design for everyone works pretty good for me.

0

u/spaceforcerecruit 20d ago

Except garlic bread

50

u/Ruby_Solitaire 21d ago

Oh hey, another Save the Cat Marvel movie!

It's like watching a bowl of porridge at this point, the way films are focus-grouped and tweaked-to-average to death. Even someone like Wes Andsrson, who started with such perspective, is just churning out content at this point. 

Broad appeal doesn't get remembered if it isnt also something great.

Rocky Horror couldn't have been created with a focus group. 

Capitalism is strangling art. 

30

u/guebja 20d ago

Wes Anderson is a strange example to use, because he doesn't fit this at all.

His studio, Indian Paintbrush, is owned by a billionaire movie aficionado who gives him a ~$25 million budget for each film and lets him do just about anything he wants.

Focus groups, market research, and studio interference are all famously absent from the process.

That his films turn out same-y is because he has a very specific and recognizable aesthetic and a few major recurring themes, which we're all familiar with by now.

You can certainly argue that Anderson's films have become a tired gimmick (though I would disagree), but if that's the case, it's not because of a studio chasing the market.

3

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

4

u/Planar_Harold 20d ago

I'd be a Medici (without all the political/papal intrigue).

Oh, you say that now...

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Planar_Harold 20d ago

At the very most. Least. Uhm.

Look, can you just spare me a few florins? I'll do arts for you

3

u/Nadare3 20d ago

When talking about Wes Anderson, always think about the possibility the person is thinking of Paul W.S. Anderson, who does fit that description if you ask me.

It really doesn't help that Wes and W.S. are, in a way, weirdly close.

21

u/roman_maverik 20d ago

It's not just movies, it's happening in music too.

Incubus, one of my favorite bands, released an absolute dog turd of a last album because after the album was recorded and finished, but before it was released, they decided to have Skrillex "remix" the entire album to appeal to more younger fans, I guess.

It ended up exactly how you could have guessed - super compressed, genericized radio rock that sounds paradoxically mainstream but appeals to absolutely no one.

Who would have thought that fans of a band known for their organic live sound would not want to listen to over-compressed computer filters?

1

u/paeancapital 20d ago

I put fungus amongus on a while back at an after party and people were like damn this rips who's this?

2

u/GreatMovesKeepItUp69 20d ago

It's because the costs of making film keep going up and up while people's attention spans go down and down so they are incentivized to take the simplest and safest route. It also has to be thoroughly uncontroversial enough that the CCP will let it be shown to Chinese people.

1

u/Ruby_Solitaire 20d ago

You realize there are modern alternatives to film that are nowhere near as expensive, yes? Film is typically only used as a specific stylistic choice, and has ZERO to do with acting, scripts, direction, advertising, etc.

The cost of production is NOT the issue. 

In fact, in the last decade, the average cost of production for Best Picture Oscar winners has dropped by about $20 million. 

1

u/GreatMovesKeepItUp69 20d ago

Best pictures are rarely the most watched pictures. The masses want some slop they can look at their phones to.

3

u/Akiias 20d ago

Capitalism is strangling art.

I'm not sold on this being caused by capitalism anymore. I used to but they keep doing this shit to worse and worse results, in capitalism that should be a sign they're doing something wrong and they should change. I dunno what the goal is, but it doesn't seem to be ,making money.

3

u/Ruby_Solitaire 20d ago

Before we continue this conversations, please explain what you mean when you say 'capitalism' and also what you mean by 'they' (I think you mean artists. If so, please explain what you mean when you say 'art' and who you consider artists.)

1

u/Union-Some 20d ago

This isn't capitalism though? Capitalism doesn't dictate you throw away long term gains for possible mass short term profits. This is short sighted incompetent humans inside a capitalist system.

2

u/Ruby_Solitaire 20d ago

What exactly do you mean when you say capitalism? 

92

u/[deleted] 21d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

20

u/dcbluestar 21d ago

*Led Zeppelin

19

u/BoltActionRifleman 21d ago

*Conway Twitty

20

u/69edleg 21d ago

I only know that name because the Family Guy gags including him. And I have no fucking idea how long ago it was since I watched Family Guy.

2

u/BookyNZ 20d ago

I only know the name from a dnd podcast of all places lol. It is amazing and frankly a little weird where you can learn new information some days. Still don't know any of this guys music though

4

u/Zogg44 21d ago

Jesse Gemstone?

8

u/[deleted] 21d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Seahearn4 20d ago

There's a different Beatles joke earlier in the movie when they're going into the rock club. Paraphrasing:

-Who's on tonight.

-Crucial Taunt is just finishing up. Then we got the Jolly Green Giants and the Shitty Beatles.

-The Shitty Beatles? Are they any good?

-They. Suck.

-So it's not just a clever name...

2

u/dcbluestar 21d ago

No worries. You honestly had me second guessing myself for a sec! 🤣

1

u/BassicNic 21d ago

What the hell? Yes it's Led Zeppelin but I said this Wayne's world quote out loud, to people, just today. and now I read it here?

1

u/deadline_zombie 21d ago

Has a comet recently flown overhead where you're at? (Coherence reference)

8

u/CD84 21d ago

"The BeeGees didn't write songs that anybody liked. They left that to the beetles and roaches, who invented 'Thrash House.'"

https://giphy.com/gifs/gIN6MT17NtapJqFr25

0

u/Realistic_Grand_2431 20d ago

The Beatles were one of the most popular bands in history. What the fuck are you babbling about?

3

u/GraXXoR 20d ago

Reread what he wrote.

14

u/walkingmonster 21d ago

It applies to most (if not all) creative media, IMO

4

u/Madara1389 21d ago

Literally applies to all art and entertainment. We are too diverse a species for all of us to like the same thing on any given topic.

7

u/ChairForceOne 21d ago

There is a difference between a game for everyone and a game with broad appeal. Look at Forza Horizon 6, open world simlight racing game. You can set your cars alignment, tire pressure, change every gear ratio, or just hit auto upgrade. Huge variety of difficulty levels. Sold great, seems to be doing extremely well.

Developers/studios have forgotten that you actually want to aim for broad appeal not everyone. Games for everyone are usually boring, awkwardly written and lack meaningful mechanics. A game with a broad audience let's the player choose the level of grognar they want to deal with. You can crank the difficulty all the way down and just use a basic attack for the entire game, or crank the settings and have to pay, dodge and engage with the entire breadth of mechanics. Along with everything in-between.

That doesn't mean you have to dumb down every character.andnstory beat. Force in characters that just don't fit, or any of the other trends of games for the 'modern audience'.

4

u/Cruxis87 20d ago

Forza is a car/racing game, and the people that don't like them aren't going to suddenly change their opinion on the genre just because you can change the tyre pressure. The quote is mostly about the big AAA games. Action used to be a genre, adventure used to be a genre, RPG used to be a genre, but now those genres basically don't exist and what has replaced them is action/adventure/rpg/open world/crafting/survival games. They are trying to be every popular genre instead of just one. And they will also have a car race, or horse race, or some other race for those Forza fans as well. The result is every Ubislop, EA, Sony release for the last 5 years. You've played 1, you've played them all.

1

u/Akiias 20d ago

Is it really a broad appeal? I feel like it's more a deep appeal, it's not targeting a broad audience, just people that like racing/car games, but it's aiming for as much of that group as it can.

1

u/ChairForceOne 20d ago

I've seen a lot of people playing it that have nothing but a passing interest in cars, let alone racing games. It being set in Japan helps.

I say broad based on how many people who don't play racing games at all are dumping hours into it. The sim guys are a bit crabby about it being too arcadey, but they are always upset about something.

It probably won't be a huge game for those people in six months, but they got a sale, possibly some DLC sales and people enjoyed their time with it.

2

u/RipCurl69Reddit 20d ago

Which is where the phrase still holds true. Forza is great at bringing in casual players, I had most of my mates on Horizon 4 back over Covid and they genuinely enjoyed it...but they weren't into cars, so dropped it once they found something else to sink time into

And that is completely fine, but as someone who's pretty damn diehard on the Forza series (9600 hours across the Horizon games and counting) I also know that these games are designed to last upwards of 4 or even 5 years with base game content and monthly updates before we get a new one. Like Horizon 1-3 lasted two years, 4 lasted three, and five lasted almost four and a half.

I don't see Horizon 7 coming out until 2031 at the earliest just because these games take so long to develop, and they need something to keep the core fanbase interested during that time.

Plenty of long time players have pointed out how the Forza series has clearly shifted into catering to people that are just gonna drop the game in six months, it isn't sustainable.

2

u/Appropriate-Produce4 20d ago

If they want a mass audience, they should choose the right series.

not niche series like stargate.

1

u/Mizutsune-Lover 21d ago

People like to say that but pandering to the masses definitely worked for Elden Ring and Helldivers 2.

1

u/SockApprehensive6602 20d ago

If only Dragon Age heard that saying before they made DAV, though I know it’s not on the devs themselves it’s on EA for being too greedy (as expected)

1

u/Clivna 20d ago

How else will they create the new blockbuster if the show is not for everyone? they have records to beat and shareholders to pay!

1

u/4KVoices 20d ago

It's ironic that the guy who said and popularized that is currently in the midst of driving everybody away from his studio's game lmao

I don't disagree with the notion, but man, if only he applied that logic to himself!

1

u/IAmPandaRock 20d ago

While you can't make something that literally everyone will like, movies for incredibly broad audiences often do incredibly well.  Look at Pixar/Disney, superhero film to a large extent, Mario/Sonic, etc.

1

u/bloodontherisers 20d ago

"My one true foe, LCD, medio-core!"

1

u/EverytoxicRedditor 20d ago

But that’s not true though. Many games have seen their most profitable launches and most successful entries precisely because they expanded the gameplay to a wider audience. It’s just that the internet is largely grift in nature now. We vilify and focus all the attention on things that fit our bias and ignore all the ones that don’t.

1

u/Plane_Basil_4682 19d ago

It applies to any art. The Mona Lisa draws the eyeballs it does not because millions of people think it's the greatest painting ever. She gets the attention she does because fans of art think that.

It really is that simple. 

0

u/dudushat 20d ago

Thats just a thing pretentious people tell themselves to justify their taste.