you would find very few instances of films released before 1990.
I disagree. I think most movie snobs are actually biased AGAINST modern movies. Take "enlightened" movie people like the AFI or (haha) Harry Knowles. They gizz all over some 1932 "Frankenstein meets Tarzan" movie but don't give modern movies their props (except LOtR, which I'm sure Knowles literally masterbates to). When the AFI top 100 movies came out they were mostly films from 1960's and that era.
Well, to the kiddies today, 1999's Final Fantasy 7 is "nostalgia."
I used to babysit a kid and I asked him if he ever played the original Super Mario Bros. He said "Yeah! I own it!" and he put it in the machine. Sure enough, on the screen comes "It's-a-me... Mahhhhhrio!" - he thought Super Mario 64 was the original Super Mario game!
I remember back in "the day" (1999ish) there were 3 options for reviewing a book: "I am a reader and I would like to comment," "I am the author of this book and I would like to comment" and "I am the publisher and I would like to comment."
Now, perhaps it was too hard to verify the true author comments or they simply had too many fake "I'm the author" reviews, but allowing the author to actually say his/her piece might be helpful/insightful (perhaps, even... "+5 insightful?")
no no, my point was that simpsons fans have continually been saying that the show is going downhill, yet there have continually been classic episodes ever since the "jump the shark" talks began...
Re:Reminds me of Christopher Guest movies
on
The Simpsons Movie
·
· Score: 1
perfect analogy. you got my point exactly. In 3 years, they'll long for the "good old episodes" like the one when marge taught the students history (last sunday's episode)
Are you kidding? Well, I guess we each have our own tastes, but I loved that episode! Some of my fav lines:
Gibson: You want me to replace the villain with a dog? I mean nobody will know what's going on.
Homer: They will if you set up that the dog is evil. All you do is have to show him doing this. [lowers eyelids and glances around in shifty-eyed fashion] The people will suspect the dog.
Homer: (from the press gallery) I second that motion. (holds up a rifle) With a vengeance! (tosses rifle to Gibson)
(Catching the rifle, Gibson jumps up on a table and quips, "All in favor, say die."
Homer: "It's funny if you make everything fast-motion!" [cue opening movie in 3x speed, with 3x voices]
Robin [Burt Ward, to Adam West]: Shutup! We're not supposed to talk!
Executive #1: Oh my G-d! He's a Dummy! Executive #2: Yeah, but he sells tickets! (Test driving the electric car:) Homer: Salt water seems to be good for it. (The car blows up.)
"Liked it despite the abscence of flubber...Glaven?" - Mel Gibson reading Prof. Frink's review
there'd be too many film geeks whining how all the best tv/movies are from japan, UK, etc. (not that they make bad stuff by any means, but they would simply whine at the "americanized" version of the term "hollywood")
1996: Simpsons used to be good. It sucks now. These new episodes (George Bush as a neighbor, 22 Short Films about Springfield) suck.
1998: Simpsons hasn't been funny in years. It's best years are behind us. No good shows are made anymore (Bart and Homer become carnies, Kidz Newz). It's such a shell of what it used to be.
2000: Man oh man do the episodes today suck. I mean, what happened to the quality episodes of yesteryear? Did you see last sunday's episode? Worst episode ever (Homer as a Food critic, Behind the Laughter, Apu has Octuplets)
2001: Wow. There haven't been good eps in years (Bart in a boyband, "Homer's Day/Bart's Day/Lisa's Day," Praiseland)
2002: Man, this show is SO unfunny now it's a joke. There hasn't been a good episode in like the last few years. The episodes today completely lack any humor (Homer smokes marijuana, "Angry Dad," "Springshield"). What happened to all the classic episodes, like "Homer as a Food Critic" and "George Bush as a Neighbor?" 2004: Wow. This show sucks today. Such a shell of what it used to be.
Can we stop with all the "Simpsons sucks!" rants? I mean, we get proven over-and-over that it's still top-notch. Point is, we've been hearing "The Simpsons Suck!" for years now, and yet it's simply not true. Every time fanboys say an episode sucks, I guarentee you 2-3 years later it's known as classic and now the new episodes suck.
I have a theory. Perhaps simpson fans are so into the show that we know nearly every episode since it's on everyday. When these shows rerun, we see them over and over, and pick up on so many more jokes. But when we see them new for the first time, we don't catch all the humor and therefore it "suffers." Pick any episode from 3 years ago and I guarentee you people ranted how bad it was the morning after it aired. But today we have at least 3-4 classic lines from it (Example: "Trilogy of error" - 2001's season finale... definately WAY INTO the era when fanboys said the show no longer had humor and was terrible):
Dr. Nick: Flammable means inflammable? What a country! Bart: How'd you find this place? Milhouse: This is where I go to cry. Homer: Lingro... dead? Linguo: Linguo is dead. Soooo many others, just from that episode. Point is, before you say how awful the show is now, realize that once the current eps hit the syndication circuit, they'll be "classic" too.
I think inherently, a hobbyist will do a better job than a worker.
Unfortunately, because of the success of CS and DC, there probably will be "mod-contracts" out, in a "make something cool by this Q2 deadline," which will NOT inspire CS/DC quality...
If possible, I'd make your comment +6, insightful.
It's so cliche that anyone/any company who tried to make money, especially on something they used to do for less/free, is selling out. Are there evil corporations? Certainly. But are all corporations evil? Certainly not.
All politicians are bad... All corporations are evil... Bush is teh sux!
etc. etc... "saving the life of a politician is kind of a neutral act in life" - now, if you had said "giving your life for someone else is not for me" then I would still disagree, but it would at least be arguable. You seem to live by the naive notion that all politicians are corrupt and evil. I pity that deluded world...
If Robert F. Kennedy's was saved, and he were able to have been president, I can guarentee you the world would have been different. How? No one will ever know. But I am certain things would have been different.
The article describes some levels from the game...
-The Golden Gate bridge -The Los Alamos nuclear research facility in New Mexico -Denver International Airport -A climactic stage where an airliner threatens to crash into the White House.
I have to say, with the right creative team behind this, and 2 friends fighting/shooting side-by-side, this could be one hell of a game...
Bill Clinton authorized NASA to launch missions to mars every 20 months when Mars is in an opportune window. It is actually cheaper to launch a $300 million probe every other year than wait every 5 years and launch a $500 million one (my cornell profs, who run the current MERs explains it) - sitting around w/no payoff loses you money. Sucessful missions like pathfinder and MERs 2003 get you science and grants. The 20-month (or whatever the window is) has been followed pretty closely:
1997: Pathfinder/Mars Global Surveyor 1999: Mars Climate Orbiter/Mars Polar Lander (both lost) 2001: Mars Oddessey/Mars 2001 Lander (Code name: Apex - cancelled after the 1999 failures) 2003: "Athena:" A lander that was planned back in the late 90's, then cancelled after the 1999 failures(much of Athena became incorporated into the current MERs). Spirit/Opporunity (also Japan and ESA took advantage of the opportune planetary alignment).
Also, before the 1999 failures, there was an amazingly complex Mars Sample Return mission in it's initial stages planned for 2008. Professor Squyres (Spirit/Opportunity leader) was also to have been involved in that. It was a sort of "Rube-Goldberg" trick that would have had a lander on the surface, scoop up some soil, put it in a rocket not much bigger than a model rocket, launch it into Mars orbit, rendezevous with an orbitting satellite, launch it back to earth and finally be snapped up by a helicopter as it paracheutted down over the American desert (this parachutte technique happens to be how StarDust's sample will be retrieved). That mission woulda been so cool though. Honestly, making it work sounds even cooler than the actual specimen we woulda gotten back!
I was wondering why there aren't more compliants as such...
You're in a 6-person room and you are actually playing against 5 people in the same dorm/friends chatting over IM about what they have.
seems like "too easy" a scam to make a quick (minumum) $50 between the 5 of them. At best they make some serious $$$, at worst they get themselves $20 or so to buy they pizzas for the night...
I remember when I'd browse EB when I was a kid with my friends, and what could seriously sell us on a game was to look at the back of the box and see the 4 pictures on the back of the NES/PC game. We could totally be like "whoah! look at the 'multimedia' version of Kings Quest 6 (i.e. it was on a cd-rom) versus the floppy version (on like 11 disks)!"
I don't remember a single game I've bought in the last few years because of graphics. Sure, they're nice, but nowhere near say, the top 3 selling points of a game (genre, gameplay/multiplay, reviews)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I think their idea was to not have 20 of the 64 games be 5 zelda, 6 mario, 6 Final Fantasy and 3 Quake games alone...
you would find very few instances of films released before 1990.
I disagree. I think most movie snobs are actually biased AGAINST modern movies. Take "enlightened" movie people like the AFI or (haha) Harry Knowles. They gizz all over some 1932 "Frankenstein meets Tarzan" movie but don't give modern movies their props (except LOtR, which I'm sure Knowles literally masterbates to). When the AFI top 100 movies came out they were mostly films from 1960's and that era.
...I don't think the gaming public is qualified to choose the best game of all time.
yes. let's leave it to the "professionals" at GameSpy (ha).
Well, to the kiddies today, 1999's Final Fantasy 7 is "nostalgia."
I used to babysit a kid and I asked him if he ever played the original Super Mario Bros. He said "Yeah! I own it!" and he put it in the machine. Sure enough, on the screen comes "It's-a-me... Mahhhhhrio!" - he thought Super Mario 64 was the original Super Mario game!
Is there a decent online tutorial on how to Settlers? My friends always play and i'm left out... :(
If you buy a starrom, or 10, can you then legally set up a mame machine that plays 10 classic games and charge a dime per play?
just get Midway Arcade Treasures for any of the current-gen consoles - $20 and you get all the games mentioned here...
I remember back in "the day" (1999ish) there were 3 options for reviewing a book: "I am a reader and I would like to comment," "I am the author of this book and I would like to comment" and "I am the publisher and I would like to comment."
Now, perhaps it was too hard to verify the true author comments or they simply had too many fake "I'm the author" reviews, but allowing the author to actually say his/her piece might be helpful/insightful (perhaps, even... "+5 insightful?")
...adding you to my "friends" list...
no no, my point was that simpsons fans have continually been saying that the show is going downhill, yet there have continually been classic episodes ever since the "jump the shark" talks began...
perfect analogy. you got my point exactly. In 3 years, they'll long for the "good old episodes" like the one when marge taught the students history (last sunday's episode)
Are you kidding? Well, I guess we each have our own tastes, but I loved that episode! Some of my fav lines:
Gibson: You want me to replace the villain with a dog? I mean nobody will know what's going on.
Homer: They will if you set up that the dog is evil. All you do is have to show him doing this. [lowers eyelids and glances around in shifty-eyed fashion] The people will suspect the dog.
Homer: (from the press gallery) I second that motion. (holds up a rifle) With a vengeance! (tosses rifle to Gibson) (Catching the rifle, Gibson jumps up on a table and quips, "All in favor, say die."
Homer: "It's funny if you make everything fast-motion!" [cue opening movie in 3x speed, with 3x voices]
Robin [Burt Ward, to Adam West]: Shutup! We're not supposed to talk!
Executive #1: Oh my G-d! He's a Dummy!
Executive #2: Yeah, but he sells tickets!
(Test driving the electric car:) Homer: Salt water seems to be good for it. (The car blows up.)
"Liked it despite the abscence of flubber...Glaven?" - Mel Gibson reading Prof. Frink's review
there'd be too many film geeks whining how all the best tv/movies are from japan, UK, etc. (not that they make bad stuff by any means, but they would simply whine at the "americanized" version of the term "hollywood")
1996: Simpsons used to be good. It sucks now. These new episodes (George Bush as a neighbor, 22 Short Films about Springfield) suck.
1998: Simpsons hasn't been funny in years. It's best years are behind us. No good shows are made anymore (Bart and Homer become carnies, Kidz Newz). It's such a shell of what it used to be.
2000: Man oh man do the episodes today suck. I mean, what happened to the quality episodes of yesteryear? Did you see last sunday's episode? Worst episode ever (Homer as a Food critic, Behind the Laughter, Apu has Octuplets)
2001: Wow. There haven't been good eps in years (Bart in a boyband, "Homer's Day/Bart's Day/Lisa's Day," Praiseland)
2002: Man, this show is SO unfunny now it's a joke. There hasn't been a good episode in like the last few years. The episodes today completely lack any humor (Homer smokes marijuana, "Angry Dad," "Springshield"). What happened to all the classic episodes, like "Homer as a Food Critic" and "George Bush as a Neighbor?"
2004: Wow. This show sucks today. Such a shell of what it used to be.
Can we stop with all the "Simpsons sucks!" rants? I mean, we get proven over-and-over that it's still top-notch. Point is, we've been hearing "The Simpsons Suck!" for years now, and yet it's simply not true. Every time fanboys say an episode sucks, I guarentee you 2-3 years later it's known as classic and now the new episodes suck.
I have a theory. Perhaps simpson fans are so into the show that we know nearly every episode since it's on everyday. When these shows rerun, we see them over and over, and pick up on so many more jokes. But when we see them new for the first time, we don't catch all the humor and therefore it "suffers." Pick any episode from 3 years ago and I guarentee you people ranted how bad it was the morning after it aired. But today we have at least 3-4 classic lines from it (Example: "Trilogy of error" - 2001's season finale... definately WAY INTO the era when fanboys said the show no longer had humor and was terrible):
Dr. Nick: Flammable means inflammable? What a country!
Bart: How'd you find this place? Milhouse: This is where I go to cry.
Homer: Lingro... dead? Linguo: Linguo is dead.
Soooo many others, just from that episode. Point is, before you say how awful the show is now, realize that once the current eps hit the syndication circuit, they'll be "classic" too.
hahaha
I think inherently, a hobbyist will do a better job than a worker.
Unfortunately, because of the success of CS and DC, there probably will be "mod-contracts" out, in a "make something cool by this Q2 deadline," which will NOT inspire CS/DC quality...
If possible, I'd make your comment +6, insightful.
It's so cliche that anyone/any company who tried to make money, especially on something they used to do for less/free, is selling out. Are there evil corporations? Certainly. But are all corporations evil? Certainly not.
Hugh looks boyish, but actually he's 35, and takes this shit very seriously.
Boy, can this sucker write! New York Times, here he comes!
I am hereby filing a patent for a programs in which the output "Hello World" comes up on the screen.
Anyone who copies this will feel the wrath of my lawyers...
Pinball on the NES ruled...
All politicians are bad...
All corporations are evil...
Bush is teh sux!
etc. etc...
"saving the life of a politician is kind of a neutral act in life" - now, if you had said "giving your life for someone else is not for me" then I would still disagree, but it would at least be arguable. You seem to live by the naive notion that all politicians are corrupt and evil. I pity that deluded world...
If Robert F. Kennedy's was saved, and he were able to have been president, I can guarentee you the world would have been different. How? No one will ever know. But I am certain things would have been different.
The article describes some levels from the game...
-The Golden Gate bridge
-The Los Alamos nuclear research facility in New Mexico
-Denver International Airport
-A climactic stage where an airliner threatens to crash into the White House.
I have to say, with the right creative team behind this, and 2 friends fighting/shooting side-by-side, this could be one hell of a game...
Bill Clinton authorized NASA to launch missions to mars every 20 months when Mars is in an opportune window. It is actually cheaper to launch a $300 million probe every other year than wait every 5 years and launch a $500 million one (my cornell profs, who run the current MERs explains it) - sitting around w/no payoff loses you money. Sucessful missions like pathfinder and MERs 2003 get you science and grants. The 20-month (or whatever the window is) has been followed pretty closely:
1997: Pathfinder/Mars Global Surveyor
1999: Mars Climate Orbiter/Mars Polar Lander (both lost)
2001: Mars Oddessey/Mars 2001 Lander (Code name: Apex - cancelled after the 1999 failures)
2003: "Athena:" A lander that was planned back in the late 90's, then cancelled after the 1999 failures(much of Athena became incorporated into the current MERs). Spirit/Opporunity (also Japan and ESA took advantage of the opportune planetary alignment).
Also, before the 1999 failures, there was an amazingly complex Mars Sample Return mission in it's initial stages planned for 2008. Professor Squyres (Spirit/Opportunity leader) was also to have been involved in that. It was a sort of "Rube-Goldberg" trick that would have had a lander on the surface, scoop up some soil, put it in a rocket not much bigger than a model rocket, launch it into Mars orbit, rendezevous with an orbitting satellite, launch it back to earth and finally be snapped up by a helicopter as it paracheutted down over the American desert (this parachutte technique happens to be how StarDust's sample will be retrieved). That mission woulda been so cool though. Honestly, making it work sounds even cooler than the actual specimen we woulda gotten back!
I was wondering why there aren't more compliants as such...
You're in a 6-person room and you are actually playing against 5 people in the same dorm/friends chatting over IM about what they have.
seems like "too easy" a scam to make a quick (minumum) $50 between the 5 of them. At best they make some serious $$$, at worst they get themselves $20 or so to buy they pizzas for the night...
I remember when I'd browse EB when I was a kid with my friends, and what could seriously sell us on a game was to look at the back of the box and see the 4 pictures on the back of the NES/PC game. We could totally be like "whoah! look at the 'multimedia' version of Kings Quest 6 (i.e. it was on a cd-rom) versus the floppy version (on like 11 disks)!"
I don't remember a single game I've bought in the last few years because of graphics. Sure, they're nice, but nowhere near say, the top 3 selling points of a game (genre, gameplay/multiplay, reviews)