Deliberately misinterpreting drawings

well, it matters on the situation. for example, sometimes i like to throw in a little creative twist, while others will say tha a hamburger is "some poop in between bread."

It depends.

If a word has many meanings, or a name could refer to a number of different people, it's ok to pick which ever one you think would best suit it.

If you see a clear picture of something and describe it as something else, or vice versa, then that can be a problem.

I don't really like it. If someone describes a panel as something completely different from what was drawn, but I look at it and think, "Oh yeah, it really does look like that," it's fine and often amazing. When it's forced, not so much. It really hasn't happened too much to me, but I see it all the time. I always love when I see someone try to do this, but the next artist is clever/lucky enough to pick up on what the original idea was.

Sometimes you'll see someone not recognize a character and then go into their gallery and see they've drawn/described that very same character before. It's like they decide they're sick of a certain subject and take it upon themselves to "fix" what they see as a "problem." Other times you can tell someone didn't think an idea was interesting enough, so they find some real or perceived "flaw" in a drawing to nitpick, though the intent is clearly recognizable. I've seen someone describe someone's drawing of a person in profile view as a "one-eyed man." Seriously?

Often times it simply derails something that actually was interesting/funny into something less. You can't really judge something like that from a single panel out of context of the whole game. I can see why a drawer could feel like they wasted effort, because their panel ends up having no real bearing on the game. The describer took it upon themselves to "reboot" it into something they think is better. In my opinion, misunderstandings are only funny when they feel real or the panel is genuinely ambiguous (or simply offensive).

I think @John325 pretty much nails it.

There's been times where I've given a deliberately ambiguous/sarcastic phrase in response to a really indistinct drawing, but deliberate attempts to derail a game by really stretching for a description aren't fair. It's the verbal equivalent of drawing a dick on your panel regardless of the prompt. Even if you may be conscientious enough not to twist the game into something NSFW, you cut the narrative thread.

THAT SAID, I don't think people should be voted down as trolls unless they're hijacking the game into something obscene. There's a lot of times it can be hard to tell whether someone was genuinely confused by an image versus derailing. Better to just award no points if you think it's a potential derail--or don't find it that clever.

I do that if I feel the drawing is inappropriate but not enough to be flagged. Or stupid. Like poop, boobs, other crude stuff. Or if it's another pikachu, rainbow, nyan cat I would be really inclined to steer it elswhere (but's that the case I could not, pikachu is pikachu no matter what, you can't turn that into a yellow cat). Or if it's really boring/nondescriptive. Or if it's something really nasty I try to turn it into something nice and cute. There seems to be too much violence and horrible thing in real world, I don't need to see it here. Other people might do it the opposite way, that's what makes the results so diverse. . If the drawing/word in caption can be interpreted in more different ways I just choose the one that seems funnier/more interesting than the "right one". To summarize I try to create stories (that's what I think we all try or should try to do). If I don't like the story that's most obvious, I spin it. . And I don't see it as problematic. I love creativity in all shapes or forms and I'd mostly prefer failed creativity over succesful but blend description. Because streak of succesful descriptive drawings and captions will be just the same picture over and over again, which quite a lot of people might hail as huge success but for me it's just boring. Plus creative descriptions can be shorter. But I would never come up with something that just is not there. I have to see it in the picture. . For example a game that's not superb, but #14 is quite charming: http://drawception.com/viewgame/bAYfOrCtDm/if-you-tilt-your-head-left-its-a-table/ , without the complete derailment at #7, it would be sleeping tables till the end. Fun fun fun. And some spins of my own: 1)http://drawception.com/viewgame/OdbQSP3Gx6/mr-death-has-a-new-hobby/ - there is no Wes Craven in the picture but it seemed like more amusing idea then "Drawception=death" or "Drawception will kill you" and the next picture is great. 2)http://drawception.com/viewgame/jnyXpx5PWL/edmon-low-library/ : it's clear that's not the Terminator in the drawing, but that's still an amusing idea. 3) http://drawception.com/viewgame/EhqQ8h2QrS/big/ : I know that there is nothing more PG13 than boobs but c'mon, it might have led to less interesting game, but I still stand by my description.

This is why I find points irritating. People try to be "clever" to get points. It turns what is supposed to be a collectivist exercise into some Randian set-piece for the individual benefit of some twit who fancies himself John Galt and thinks by being better than everyone else he can score himself some utterly meaningless points and thereby win a game which isn't supposed to be a competition.

SmashTheState: What do you mean? People give points to drawings/captions they like and think they're good: so ruining a came would give 0 points. If it receives points it means people like it and it's good, no? Seems like win-win to me.

If it's a description of someone specific, and I don't feel like drawing them, I just skip it.

I just say what I see. It might not be exactly what the person who drew the drawing intended me to describe it as but then where is the fun in that?

I've seen far more games that became completely boring because no one bothered to try anything original, than I've seen games ruined by someone trying to derail them. You can't just wait till someone with less drawing skills comes along and makes it hard for the next person to figure out what they drew, or someone that hasn't seen some massively popular pop culture icon before.

Also, SmashTheState, you make yourself look like one of the people you are describing by using random name drops from literature to try to prove your point.

My "name drop" was not random. Several of the people involved in this discussion have been involved in similar discussions where Randian dogma was brought up to justify the presence of competition in what is supposed to be a cooperative game.

But are people trying to be clever to get points, or are they trying to be clever in order to produce a more enjoyable game?

I know which of those two I go for.

SmashTheState: What competition? How does it work? IMHO you could compete only with yourself, since the points are cummulative, the total sum is meaningles by itself. But I think most people just want to have fun and create great things regardles of points. At least I would still play the same way if the points system was removed.

A lot of people clearly do see this as a competition, that's quite clear.

With me it's probably self-validation. I like the feeling of knowing that someone has had a positive emotional response to something I've done. If the points were removed, it wouldn't change how I play (though I'd probably start reading the comments with a lot more attention ;) )

Yes, that's a great feeling. I don't thing I would get that response if I've shown one of my good pictures to my boss for example. Only on the Internets. :)

The simple act of having points creates the competition, regardless of whether or not they mean anything. Everyone views them with meaning. Not one of you can honestly say that , when you view a completed game in which you participated, you have not compared yourself to others, like- why did he get more "points" mines so much better, or feel puffed up because you were the "best" Many of us discovered somewhere along the way that to get into the leader boards will generate more "points" - so that is coveted. For me, it is a return to a childhood passion(drawing) and I am getting caught up in the competition aspect also. But outside of this game, none of my drawings would make framed and on my wall or selling for 119.9 million. Back to topic.. A game I participate in becomes a little part of me, so if it gets defaced (penor, or scribbles) I feel a bit personally violated. If it is a clever misinterpretation, I can appreciate it.

I have found that some derailers (wade(aka he-man) for example) if the artwork is done well enough, it goes almost unnoticed.

On the occasions where I've compared my points to others in games, it's usually when a panel so much better than mine has received less than me. To give an example, the final panel in this deserves way more votes than it got:

http://drawception.com/viewgame/OheOrD34zj/but-our-princess-is-in-another-castle/

@Lufferov

I admit that I have tried to go off the deep end when it comes to describing even the most mundane of certain drawings.

My best example, I think, would probably be the Diablo logo: http://drawception.com/viewgame/9zZsQ4W6W5/diablo/ ... I could have said "Diablo III comes out on 5/15/2012" but that just seems bland to me ... that and I never really had an interest in Diablo but that's another thread all together. Seeing that I have a heavy interest in gaming, it was tricky to steer away from the fact that it could be the Diablo logo. However, I tried to find what other alternate interpretations that drawing could be. After all, I had 10 minutes to come up with something interesting. The lines looked somewhat tribal so I thought of The Native Indians and went with that. Seeing that there were texts that said "Brace Yourself" and a specific date, I would assume something big and earth-shattering would happen. So I went with the Mayan Apocalypse theory.

Sometimes, I just find a certain humor in it, but I usually know my limits. To me, I find a lot of "perfect" games to be rather boring so I try to sneak in a certain detail that doesn't seem too blatant; or exaggerate an alternate meaning if I can find one. If a drawing has some minor detail on it, I might point it out. Likewise, I might stick a minor detail in my own drawings in hopes that someone might pick it up, which I hope might add a little spice to the story but not totally derail it.

The way I see it is that if at least one noticeable element, ideally the broadest element, from the previous drawing makes it into the description, then the game is still safe.

There might be minor exceptions, depending on how you see it. For example, this game: http://drawception.com/viewgame/LRCA3CdKPh/star-wars-alcoholics/ ... Panel 4 shows Star Wars characters in a picnic. However, Panel 5 generalizes the situation by removing the Star Wars element. I think it still gets a pass, but seeing that Star Wars is such a big-name entity, I could probably see how some of fans might get offended by the potential deliberate lack of knowledge of specific characters. On the other hand Panel 5 mentioned a father and kids. Technically speaking, Vader is the father of Luke and Leia.