>I see what you mean. I shouldn't reject the idea out of hand. It sure seems like it's a lot closer to being a funny ha-ha game than a serious action game.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
>But the problem, aside from my wounded pride, is that since I'm not trying to be funny, I don't really understand what people are laughing at. I seriously doubt I can do it reliably.
There's nothing to be wounded about. And happy design accidents happen. Once it's there, you can look at what makes it good to try to understand it. Or really, here, I think all you need to do is develop the gameplay properly and model the game's aesthetics around the inherently over-the-top exaggeration it entails. Maybe something Jojo-ish?
>Like, I've never heard of something that managed to be so bad it's good on purpose, y'know?
IIRC Five Nights at Freddy's was made because the developer had been making games with models that were supposed to be appealing, but found by players to be off-putting