I can tell you've only played a little DN:3D. The reason DNF has had so much attention payed to it isn't that it's taking forever. It's because it's the sequel to what many consider to be one of the best games of all time. Duke Nukem 3d had realistic environments (something that were really neat to us back then! We were in LA, man! I mean, Doom is some weird Mars research base, but I'm fighting aliens in LA!), genuine humor (and also crude humor), wonderful weapons (the shrink ray shrunk enemies really small, and then you could step on them, and who can forget the pipe bombs), and a jetpack. I mean, come on. Even today few games have jetpacks.
Duke Nukem 3d was an awesome game. You can find legions of fans, and that's the reason why DNF is getting on Slashdot: we may have given up on the new game, but we all remember the joy of the old one.
When I was little my dad told me ice cream was "grownup food" and that I wouldn't like it at all. He still laughs about it when he remembered the first time I tried ice cream.
While this anecdote may imply it, I am not exactly saying that you can't fall from a plane into mud and be fine. I'm just, you know, trying to be reasonable about this. People lie sometimes:D
Yes, but there's also a monthly subscription fee. If you decide the new content is complete crap, and quit paying, you're up a creek without a paddle. With SiN, if you really like the first couple of levels but everyone says the third one sucks, who cares? You can still play the first two, and you could buy the fourth one when it comes out.
How long does it take you to play through Half-Life? 3 weeks? And then you wait years and years for the next one. How long did it take you to play Max Payne? Certainly less than a month, it it took something like 2 years for us to get Max Payne 2. Episodic content is much, much better if you want to wait the least amount of time before getting your gaming fix: in the end, it will take just as long to develop as much content as you get in an average video game, but instead of saving it all up for one release every 3 years, you'll get it in smaller portions every 6 months. Do the math, man. That's a whole lot less waiting.
I've talked to a good amount of people for whom the opposite is true. In fact, I only know one person who did not thoroughly enjoy Serenity, and I was able to convince him that he would enjoy Firefly (he hasn't watched it yet). Nobody I have ever heard of (except you) has disliked Serenity enough to make them never want to see Firefly.
You could take the stairs. Last I checked 14 floors (7 to leavea and 7 to return) was much less than the daily recommended workout that doctors say you ought to do, in order to not drop dead or get fat or something.
But that comic's news post had Gabe discussing an email he got that TOLD HIM ABOUT THE SECRET ENDING.
Uh, great?
on
Kong Lives!
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Not that this isn't neat or anything, but like, what? Who cares? Mod me as flamebait or whatever if you want, it just seems like choosing to report this out of all the game news out there is sort of odd. Where's the rationale for talking about this, instead of anything else?
Well, I only watched half an episode. I got all this from a New York Times Magazien article on Battlestar:Galactica, which talked about the climate of the show matching up closely to today's political climate etc.
I'm not the paranoid type, and I'd say the advertising agency they hired was full of idiots, who either didn't "get" Serenity or don't "get" anything at all, and the movies that they advertise succeed or fail based largely on forces taht whoever marketed this film really have no control over.
Hell, for the marketing that movie got, the studio should get paid for it. They airbrushed the prettiest people into something resembling darkened rubber masks, then gave them all guns and sorta stuck them together. I can't even look at the stuff. At the very least, an advertisement shouldn't want to make you look away, dangit!
I think there's something to your theory: Whedon's a film major, and like most film majors (and IMHO most smart people) he saw (sees?) TV as complete and utter crap (as do I). After his horrid experience with Fox and their mangling of the order and timeslot that Firefly got, I can see him basically giving up TV for good. He was forced into it when the Buffy movie got screwed over and he ended up making it a TV show: maybe he just wants to get out of there forever.
Not like I'm happy with that. Firefly was in a small set of shows that didn't make me want to gouge my eyes out, and in that small set, was the ONLY show that I regarded as something that was not a partial waste of my time.
Cowboys in space has absolutely zero to do with the reason most people like Firefly, just like "the military in space" has zero to do with why people like Battlestar: Galactica (the new one). It's sci-fi that relates to the viewer that people like. Battlestar does this politically. Their fight against an amorphous enemy and their political climate mirrors ours, and people see it as a thrilling drama instead of Star Wars repackaged. Firefly gets even deeper than that: its characters deal with what it is to be human, they deal with the way people always have been, the way people are, and, in this case, the way people will be in the future. It's the believability, not the cool cowboys in spaceships, that 99% of people love so dearly.
Haha, good one. Seriously though, they're sitting on Firefly RIGHT NOW. Even if they were listening, they're not going to be swayed by a bunch of people saying "I'll pay 10 bucks!" They still probably blame the show's failure on the show itself instead of all that wacky episode order timeslot crap they pulled, and remember, this is Fox we're talking about. They cancelled Family Guy and Futurama, and they fought tooth and nail to stop Star Wars (Star Freaking Wars, the first one) from ever being made. They're not #1 when it comes to doing things that fans would love.
I watched Battlestar:Galactica once. Whereas Firefly strikes a chord with me because it is both sci-fi and a wonderful drama suffused with humanity, Battlestar seemed like it was trying to strike a chord by being both sci-fi and edgy political commentary or something. The Cylons have to be metaphors for terrorists, etc. This is why I didn't like it: although both Firefly and Battlestar go way beyond sci-fi and tap into our lives today, Firefly does this by exploring what it is to be human. Battlestar just does this by exploring today's (imagined?) culture of fear, distrust, and paranoia. I'm sure that could make good sci-fi; in fact, I'm sure that's made good sci-fi. I just feel like Battlestar is something I've watched before: an explicit attempt to take elements of our modern lives and marry them to spaceships. Firefly doesn't try to draw parallels to today; instead, it makes the future believable in terms of how we've acted and always acted. To me, it's the difference between rewriting The West Wing in the future, and doing something original.
The whole "binary" thing is, to me, the very crux of the situation and gets right down to why people didn't like Wash's and Book's deaths. I think if you gave me 5 minutes with Whedon, I could convince him to stop killing off his characters (apparently he does this in Buffy too, although I wouldn't know): it seems like his urge to make the universe so realistic results in deaths that otherwise don't make sense. It's obvious to us, and obvious to Whedon, that you can't have people just dancing around the galaxy fighting the Alliance and Reavers and god knows what else, and then at the end of the movie they're all a big happy family again and everything's all right. Whedon's solution to this is to kill people, not just "red shirts" who we don't really care about but people who are near and dear to us. Yes, this does erasae the idea that these characters are immortal, and it makes them real people. I think, though, that Joss is sort of viewing characters on a sort of discrete scale: they either have a problem, have solved their problem, or are dead.
From what little I've read about Buffy (after loving Firefly to death, I figured I ought to check up on this other stuff that Whedon did), it seems like every time someone hooks up with their true love, one of them gets killed. I feel like if I was able to talk to Whedon, to remind him that in real life people manage to lead all sorts of horrid, depraved, depressing lives without dying ONCE (except at the end), I would be able to get him to change his view on killing people: killing them off is his effort to make the universe real, but the end effect is to make it seem even less real, because half the time the only problems the characters have are that they're dead. I mean, come on. There are better ways than death to explore the fundamental flaws of humans.
Nintendo doesn't support piracy any more than the people who make GTA support carjacking and indiscriminate violence against innocents. It's just some character in a game, not a thinly veiled message the the top corporate echelon inserted into the game to warp impressionable children.
Hell yeah, they broke it. Let me preface this by saying I enjoyed the previous iteration of Star Wars: Galaxies and I enjoy the current iteration (less). Both, I think, had lots of qualities that people either ignored, did not appreciate, or just didn't like the way I did. I think SOE/Lucasarts did a fine job making the game, and a fine job on this new update. What they did NOT do a fine job on, though, was the whole idea of the update. Sure, you can make a game like the one they had: hilariously intricate in some parts, and inevitably unbalanced. Or, you can make a fast paced MMO-lite, like we've got now, where shooting people and hitting them with lightsabers is the objective. That's fun; it's like Star Wars. What you can't do, though, is switch between them. Nobody bought SW:G and played it for years because they wanted it to be like this new patch, and nobody's going to buy it because they like the gameplay in this new patch. SOE took a game that wasn't wildy popular, and turned it into something that's going to alienate everyone who has ever liked it and fail to attract anyone new.
Slashdot Mirror
I can tell you've only played a little DN:3D. The reason DNF has had so much attention payed to it isn't that it's taking forever. It's because it's the sequel to what many consider to be one of the best games of all time. Duke Nukem 3d had realistic environments (something that were really neat to us back then! We were in LA, man! I mean, Doom is some weird Mars research base, but I'm fighting aliens in LA!), genuine humor (and also crude humor), wonderful weapons (the shrink ray shrunk enemies really small, and then you could step on them, and who can forget the pipe bombs), and a jetpack. I mean, come on. Even today few games have jetpacks.
Duke Nukem 3d was an awesome game. You can find legions of fans, and that's the reason why DNF is getting on Slashdot: we may have given up on the new game, but we all remember the joy of the old one.
When I was little my dad told me ice cream was "grownup food" and that I wouldn't like it at all. He still laughs about it when he remembered the first time I tried ice cream. While this anecdote may imply it, I am not exactly saying that you can't fall from a plane into mud and be fine. I'm just, you know, trying to be reasonable about this. People lie sometimes :D
Yes, but there's also a monthly subscription fee. If you decide the new content is complete crap, and quit paying, you're up a creek without a paddle. With SiN, if you really like the first couple of levels but everyone says the third one sucks, who cares? You can still play the first two, and you could buy the fourth one when it comes out.
How long does it take you to play through Half-Life? 3 weeks? And then you wait years and years for the next one. How long did it take you to play Max Payne? Certainly less than a month, it it took something like 2 years for us to get Max Payne 2. Episodic content is much, much better if you want to wait the least amount of time before getting your gaming fix: in the end, it will take just as long to develop as much content as you get in an average video game, but instead of saving it all up for one release every 3 years, you'll get it in smaller portions every 6 months. Do the math, man. That's a whole lot less waiting.
I've talked to a good amount of people for whom the opposite is true. In fact, I only know one person who did not thoroughly enjoy Serenity, and I was able to convince him that he would enjoy Firefly (he hasn't watched it yet). Nobody I have ever heard of (except you) has disliked Serenity enough to make them never want to see Firefly.
I think it's sorta the opposite. 99% is lowest common denominator stuff (more viewers that way, right?) and then 1% is good.
You could take the stairs. Last I checked 14 floors (7 to leavea and 7 to return) was much less than the daily recommended workout that doctors say you ought to do, in order to not drop dead or get fat or something.
Or they could have bought one of the million R2-D2 toys/action figures/miniatures/replicas.
Oh, I read your post and thought you said the opposite. Oh well. Long story short, Slashdot doesn't need to post everything PA does. The end.
But that comic's news post had Gabe discussing an email he got that TOLD HIM ABOUT THE SECRET ENDING.
Not that this isn't neat or anything, but like, what? Who cares? Mod me as flamebait or whatever if you want, it just seems like choosing to report this out of all the game news out there is sort of odd. Where's the rationale for talking about this, instead of anything else?
I think he was talking about the "ignoring facts that don't fit your ideas" part, not the "believes in conspiracry theories" part.
Well, I only watched half an episode. I got all this from a New York Times Magazien article on Battlestar:Galactica, which talked about the climate of the show matching up closely to today's political climate etc.
I've always wanted to make a "mod parent up" post
I'm not the paranoid type, and I'd say the advertising agency they hired was full of idiots, who either didn't "get" Serenity or don't "get" anything at all, and the movies that they advertise succeed or fail based largely on forces taht whoever marketed this film really have no control over.
Hell, for the marketing that movie got, the studio should get paid for it. They airbrushed the prettiest people into something resembling darkened rubber masks, then gave them all guns and sorta stuck them together. I can't even look at the stuff. At the very least, an advertisement shouldn't want to make you look away, dangit!
Not like I'm happy with that. Firefly was in a small set of shows that didn't make me want to gouge my eyes out, and in that small set, was the ONLY show that I regarded as something that was not a partial waste of my time.
Cowboys in space has absolutely zero to do with the reason most people like Firefly, just like "the military in space" has zero to do with why people like Battlestar: Galactica (the new one). It's sci-fi that relates to the viewer that people like. Battlestar does this politically. Their fight against an amorphous enemy and their political climate mirrors ours, and people see it as a thrilling drama instead of Star Wars repackaged. Firefly gets even deeper than that: its characters deal with what it is to be human, they deal with the way people always have been, the way people are, and, in this case, the way people will be in the future. It's the believability, not the cool cowboys in spaceships, that 99% of people love so dearly.
Haha, good one. Seriously though, they're sitting on Firefly RIGHT NOW. Even if they were listening, they're not going to be swayed by a bunch of people saying "I'll pay 10 bucks!" They still probably blame the show's failure on the show itself instead of all that wacky episode order timeslot crap they pulled, and remember, this is Fox we're talking about. They cancelled Family Guy and Futurama, and they fought tooth and nail to stop Star Wars (Star Freaking Wars, the first one) from ever being made. They're not #1 when it comes to doing things that fans would love.
I watched Battlestar:Galactica once. Whereas Firefly strikes a chord with me because it is both sci-fi and a wonderful drama suffused with humanity, Battlestar seemed like it was trying to strike a chord by being both sci-fi and edgy political commentary or something. The Cylons have to be metaphors for terrorists, etc. This is why I didn't like it: although both Firefly and Battlestar go way beyond sci-fi and tap into our lives today, Firefly does this by exploring what it is to be human. Battlestar just does this by exploring today's (imagined?) culture of fear, distrust, and paranoia. I'm sure that could make good sci-fi; in fact, I'm sure that's made good sci-fi. I just feel like Battlestar is something I've watched before: an explicit attempt to take elements of our modern lives and marry them to spaceships. Firefly doesn't try to draw parallels to today; instead, it makes the future believable in terms of how we've acted and always acted. To me, it's the difference between rewriting The West Wing in the future, and doing something original.
From what little I've read about Buffy (after loving Firefly to death, I figured I ought to check up on this other stuff that Whedon did), it seems like every time someone hooks up with their true love, one of them gets killed. I feel like if I was able to talk to Whedon, to remind him that in real life people manage to lead all sorts of horrid, depraved, depressing lives without dying ONCE (except at the end), I would be able to get him to change his view on killing people: killing them off is his effort to make the universe real, but the end effect is to make it seem even less real, because half the time the only problems the characters have are that they're dead. I mean, come on. There are better ways than death to explore the fundamental flaws of humans.
Come on, annoying someone with graphical Google Ads isn't evil.
Nintendo doesn't support piracy any more than the people who make GTA support carjacking and indiscriminate violence against innocents. It's just some character in a game, not a thinly veiled message the the top corporate echelon inserted into the game to warp impressionable children.
Nice job.
Except DDO isn't exactly like that. Try out the stress test then get back to me.