Hype? Are you kidding? What hype has there been for the Revolution? It was one the smallest parts of Nintendo's presence at E3. The only big event focusing on the Revolution (that I can recall) was Iwata's keynote at TGS.
Other than that: silence, coyness, then more silence.
Whether Nintendo's gamble with work with the general public or not is yet to be seen, but one thing we're sure of now is that Revolution is a distant third when it comes to self promotion.
Maybe what you're thinking is "hype" is all the fan generated excitement. We fanboys are a noisy bunch...
Wow, I had no idea people really prefered the look of the 360 over the other Rev and PS3. This is the first time I've really had a public discussion about it.
To me the 360 looks like something a complete amateur designed. Of course I guess people like the stuff AlienWare makes too, so who am I to judge? For my money give me an Apple design any day.
I think clean and simple designs are not on the best but the most timeless. The 360 has so many unnecessary bumps and grooves. Just looks messy to me.
From a shear industrial design standpoint (nevermind rackmounting or anything else, just how does it look...), MS made by far the ugliest console last time around and are dead set on making this round no different.
Sure it's better than the horrible eyesore that the original XBOX was, but not enough. The prototypes for the PS3 and Revolution blow this thing away.
It's all about the artistic style you are going after. Too often gamers assume that the ultimate goal is perfect realism, which would be amazing but limited. The real future of games is in applying artistic styles and sensibility to games. I loved Viewtiful Joe because of its extreame style. The Wind Waker too. These games have styles that were neither grity nor realistic, but thier unique feels did an excellent job creating worlds that was easy to get lost in.
I'm not saying every game should be cell shaded, but developers should more often utilize the limitless possiblities of style in modern games.
I guess I'll have to comment on the general negativity being expressed by people who didn't like this film, both here in this thread and elsewhere.
Most of the complaints seem to stem from a general misunderstanding of QT's intentions and motivations for this film. The film's main motifs are ACTION and REVENGE. There is nothing particularly deep or difficult to comprehend in either of these themes. Action is Hollywood's favorite device. Revenge is something that is very close to the human heart. There is no need to really look for any meaning further than this. If you do you risk missing the simplicity of this film. (And then you may not like it.)
We complain about Hollywood films being too predicable and shallow, but there is something noble in QT's quest to make a movie DELIBERATELY simple. Action is its purpose, not a device. Its plot can be implied to: Injustice, then revenge. If poetry is minimalist communication, then well... far be it from me to say spring-loaded decapitations are poetic... but it looks like I just said it anyway.
To sum up, you are DEFINEATLY allowed to not like the very graphic nature of this film. I can respect that. But otherwise you may have missed the fact that this move is intentionally simple.
The Hulk was made by an accomplished film maker that made one of my (and probably one of your) favorite films of all time . Visually and artistically, Hulk (while not the BEST movie ever) was not nearly as bad as everyone pretends. I think the problem was everyone was expecting "fun but dumb" and when they received something that was a little more experimental in style and truer to the tortured character from the comic books (especially the later ones), everyone felt cheated that they didn't get a "real" comic book movie. Maybe it wasn't Lee's best decision to try passing off something so different to a summer movie audience, but in a purely academic sense it really wasn't that bad. I would even say it was good.
(Revoutions, of the other hand... I've seen better writing on a cereal box. I think they really phoned that one in.)
Slashdot Mirror
Hype? Are you kidding? What hype has there been for the Revolution? It was one the smallest parts of Nintendo's presence at E3. The only big event focusing on the Revolution (that I can recall) was Iwata's keynote at TGS.
Other than that: silence, coyness, then more silence.
Whether Nintendo's gamble with work with the general public or not is yet to be seen, but one thing we're sure of now is that Revolution is a distant third when it comes to self promotion.
Maybe what you're thinking is "hype" is all the fan generated excitement. We fanboys are a noisy bunch...
Wow, I had no idea people really prefered the look of the 360 over the other Rev and PS3. This is the first time I've really had a public discussion about it.
To me the 360 looks like something a complete amateur designed. Of course I guess people like the stuff AlienWare makes too, so who am I to judge? For my money give me an Apple design any day.
I think clean and simple designs are not on the best but the most timeless. The 360 has so many unnecessary bumps and grooves. Just looks messy to me.
From a shear industrial design standpoint (nevermind rackmounting or anything else, just how does it look...), MS made by far the ugliest console last time around and are dead set on making this round no different.
Sure it's better than the horrible eyesore that the original XBOX was, but not enough. The prototypes for the PS3 and Revolution blow this thing away.
No.
Slashdot? Wisdom? Since when?
It's all about the artistic style you are going after. Too often gamers assume that the ultimate goal is perfect realism, which would be amazing but limited. The real future of games is in applying artistic styles and sensibility to games. I loved Viewtiful Joe because of its extreame style. The Wind Waker too. These games have styles that were neither grity nor realistic, but thier unique feels did an excellent job creating worlds that was easy to get lost in.
I'm not saying every game should be cell shaded, but developers should more often utilize the limitless possiblities of style in modern games.
I guess I'll have to comment on the general negativity being expressed by people who didn't like this film, both here in this thread and elsewhere.
Most of the complaints seem to stem from a general misunderstanding of QT's intentions and motivations for this film. The film's main motifs are ACTION and REVENGE. There is nothing particularly deep or difficult to comprehend in either of these themes. Action is Hollywood's favorite device. Revenge is something that is very close to the human heart. There is no need to really look for any meaning further than this. If you do you risk missing the simplicity of this film. (And then you may not like it.)
We complain about Hollywood films being too predicable and shallow, but there is something noble in QT's quest to make a movie DELIBERATELY simple. Action is its purpose, not a device. Its plot can be implied to: Injustice, then revenge. If poetry is minimalist communication, then well... far be it from me to say spring-loaded decapitations are poetic... but it looks like I just said it anyway.
To sum up, you are DEFINEATLY allowed to not like the very graphic nature of this film. I can respect that. But otherwise you may have missed the fact that this move is intentionally simple.
One of the years best for sure.
The Hulk was made by an accomplished film maker that made one of my (and probably one of your) favorite films of all time . Visually and artistically, Hulk (while not the BEST movie ever) was not nearly as bad as everyone pretends. I think the problem was everyone was expecting "fun but dumb" and when they received something that was a little more experimental in style and truer to the tortured character from the comic books (especially the later ones), everyone felt cheated that they didn't get a "real" comic book movie. Maybe it wasn't Lee's best decision to try passing off something so different to a summer movie audience, but in a purely academic sense it really wasn't that bad. I would even say it was good.
(Revoutions, of the other hand... I've seen better writing on a cereal box. I think they really phoned that one in.)
You forgot Zelda. Sheesh.