Ok so obviously, I begged to differ... by his reasoning, we are bound by duty to exploit all new forms of media to the absolute max, regardless of storytelling, insight, believability, amusement, composition, subtlety... it would be the same as saying why did Herge limit himself to the realm of the real world and not give Tintin supercomputers, SciFi weaponry, time-machines and driving Ferraris? and why did Albert Uderzo limit himself to Gaul in the Roman times when Asterix and Obelix could've been fighting spectacular dragons and orcs alongside Odin? And why did he make Asterix such a tiny fucker when he should've made him look like Crixus, with rippling pecs and bouldering biceps? Why did Fred Quimby limit himself to pots, hunting shotguns, bear traps and pianos when he could've exploited his animating skills and made Tom and Jerry kick the shit out of each other in mecha-suits with miniguns and hydra rocket pods... oh wait, they probably did haha...Because new technology opens doors, doesn't mean they MUST be opened. There is such a thing as being nuanced. 3D computer graphics is IMO just another tool to use to tell a story, like the pens that Herge used. But what about the other doors that 3D CG opens?
Think about this, what if you want to make a porno, or an erotic comic, but you cannot afford the porn stars? Or the sets, or the camera equipment? For me 3DX opens other doors, and in my opinion, more compelling doors: namely I can avoid the cost of live porn stars, or better yet, I can work with quality actors because most porn stars are CRAP actors, and most porn directors are not any better either. Off course the quality of the actors in your 3DX is only as good as you are at posing them, but at least you have more control over them. You can also cross over styles a little easier that way, and make more believable and amusing stories in combination with proper in-your-face sex scenes, something that is rare in the porno industry.
