I actually liked the DVD movies, and would like to see more. The only weak one, in my opinion, was the first one. Beast with a Billion backs was like Amazon Women in the Mood, only longer...harder...hentai-er.
"These aren't tenticles! They're Genticles!"
Also, Bender's Game had me laughing so hard at some points I had to pause the movie and catch my breath.
I think there are two types of resurrection I can stand. 1. Keep the game exactly as is. Make it a direct port. Something akin to the Virtual Console games. 2. Overhaul it to a point where you've added lots of new stuff and new fixes. I'm thinking something along the lines of Final Fantasy remakes here. Like the PSP FFT re-vamp. Increase the things that made the game great.
Re-dos where a game is taken and warped into something else never really work for me.
"Games keep getting worse, the older you get."
I personally think that Jackson would turn it down. LotR was a fantasy movie and artistically speaking, doing another epic fantasy movie would be entirely boring. Also, I think he'd want to avoid turning into a typecast director, who could only do epic fantasy movies and nothing else.
...who's pretty much been ignored by companies in terms of being hiring. I say, screw the bastards.
Anyway, all I have to say is that artists will get paid. It'll happen. The market will change, the way information spreads will change, the way the various forms of art and how it's made will change, and the way art is spread will change. Artists will get paid. It may not be a fair pay, it could be many times better or many times worse. Artists will get paid.
Throughout history artists have created and have received some sort of payment in some way. I'm sure that the cave painters of prehistory got a sizable amount of berries for creating artwork on the cave walls. And even if they didn't get paid for it, they still did it. That's a key point to being an artist. You may end up toiling in obscurity, creating images only you will see, but if you love doing it, you'll never stop.
The artists of Greece and Rome received commissions to sculpt and paint the various gods in the various pantheons in existence at the time. I would assume some sort of payment was received for those works. Even if they didn't get a cash or store credit, they created the works just the same. Renaissance artists had only two clients, the king and the church. They got paid. They got to paint portraits of the nobility, portraits of Popes, the ceilings of chapels, vast landscapes, stunning Religious battles and triumphs.
In the early 1900s there were these two large wars, you may have heard of them, World War I and World War II. Artists made propaganda posters related to the war. But also, anti-war demonstrators had their posters and pamphlets, as well. Not to mention, there were still heavy demands for domestic publications, most (if not all) used Illustration, as photography still hadn't matured yet. So, for better or worse, artists still got paid. After the wars, the major commissioners of Illustration were magazines. That's how Norman Rockwell made a living. He got paid from magazine Illustration (covers of the Saturday Evening Post, mainly). There used to be a market for movie posters, as well. Look at films throughout the mid 1900s into the 1980s, most movie posters were painted.
Here's the point I'm trying to make. The king and the church, magazine publications, propaganda posters, movie posters, they're all gone. None of them are viable means to make a living as an artist anymore. Sure, there are still a few artists who make a living off of them, but it's very few, you can count the number of artists on one hand. The point is that the source of money for artistic people has always changed, and will continue to change. Just because there's file sharing and the Internet, where people can get these things for free, doesn't mean artists won't get paid. Most people just make the assumption that this is the way it is, was, and ever will be, and it's not. With several large corporations holding all the cards, deciding who gets paid, who doesn't, and decided whether or not to sue someone who turned their mascot into a piece of art composed of cans of poo.
I don't know what the next big wave of artistic revenue is going to be, but artist will get paid. For example, I have all of my personal artwork on the Internet. I haven't received a dime for it. No one buys the prints, no one clicks the ads on my Blog (http://www.wolflog.com/), but I don't really care. I'm creating the artwork because I enjoy it. I receive small commissions here-and-there and that's it. It's not glamorous...and my name will probably never be noticed in the art world, but I don't really care.
So, as an artist ignored by companies, who doesn't receive a huge cash influx from them. I say, screw the bastards. Maybe then, when the next form of payment for artists comes around, I'll actually receive some green.
Slashdot Mirror
Beee beee beee boo-boo-boo--chicka-chicka-chicka-chicka.
I agree. The thing about this mashup is that it's random Youtube vids. It's not remixing popular songs or basic, machine-generated hip hop crap.
I'll be impressed when it lets me transform into a ball and roll through some conveniently placed tubing.
I actually liked the DVD movies, and would like to see more. The only weak one, in my opinion, was the first one. Beast with a Billion backs was like Amazon Women in the Mood, only longer...harder...hentai-er. "These aren't tenticles! They're Genticles!" Also, Bender's Game had me laughing so hard at some points I had to pause the movie and catch my breath.
Damn those arrows are annoying.
http://www.progressquest.com/ Does all the grinding you need.
And finally you'll be saying "BLAAAAAGGHHH" and possibly while grabbing your throat/heart/stomach.
2/3 Tweets aren't spam right now?
Sheesh, he looks like a young (Friday the 13th) Kevin Bacon.
Good.
I think there are two types of resurrection I can stand. 1. Keep the game exactly as is. Make it a direct port. Something akin to the Virtual Console games. 2. Overhaul it to a point where you've added lots of new stuff and new fixes. I'm thinking something along the lines of Final Fantasy remakes here. Like the PSP FFT re-vamp. Increase the things that made the game great. Re-dos where a game is taken and warped into something else never really work for me. "Games keep getting worse, the older you get."
Well, my mom uses Firefox...so it can't be that unknown.
...I as an artist, don't like these services. I have no original things on Facebook, and I uninstalled Chrome because of the EULA.
I personally think that Jackson would turn it down. LotR was a fantasy movie and artistically speaking, doing another epic fantasy movie would be entirely boring. Also, I think he'd want to avoid turning into a typecast director, who could only do epic fantasy movies and nothing else.
Anyway, all I have to say is that artists will get paid. It'll happen. The market will change, the way information spreads will change, the way the various forms of art and how it's made will change, and the way art is spread will change. Artists will get paid. It may not be a fair pay, it could be many times better or many times worse. Artists will get paid.
Throughout history artists have created and have received some sort of payment in some way. I'm sure that the cave painters of prehistory got a sizable amount of berries for creating artwork on the cave walls. And even if they didn't get paid for it, they still did it. That's a key point to being an artist. You may end up toiling in obscurity, creating images only you will see, but if you love doing it, you'll never stop.
The artists of Greece and Rome received commissions to sculpt and paint the various gods in the various pantheons in existence at the time. I would assume some sort of payment was received for those works. Even if they didn't get a cash or store credit, they created the works just the same. Renaissance artists had only two clients, the king and the church. They got paid. They got to paint portraits of the nobility, portraits of Popes, the ceilings of chapels, vast landscapes, stunning Religious battles and triumphs.
In the early 1900s there were these two large wars, you may have heard of them, World War I and World War II. Artists made propaganda posters related to the war. But also, anti-war demonstrators had their posters and pamphlets, as well. Not to mention, there were still heavy demands for domestic publications, most (if not all) used Illustration, as photography still hadn't matured yet. So, for better or worse, artists still got paid. After the wars, the major commissioners of Illustration were magazines. That's how Norman Rockwell made a living. He got paid from magazine Illustration (covers of the Saturday Evening Post, mainly). There used to be a market for movie posters, as well. Look at films throughout the mid 1900s into the 1980s, most movie posters were painted.
Here's the point I'm trying to make. The king and the church, magazine publications, propaganda posters, movie posters, they're all gone. None of them are viable means to make a living as an artist anymore. Sure, there are still a few artists who make a living off of them, but it's very few, you can count the number of artists on one hand. The point is that the source of money for artistic people has always changed, and will continue to change. Just because there's file sharing and the Internet, where people can get these things for free, doesn't mean artists won't get paid. Most people just make the assumption that this is the way it is, was, and ever will be, and it's not. With several large corporations holding all the cards, deciding who gets paid, who doesn't, and decided whether or not to sue someone who turned their mascot into a piece of art composed of cans of poo.
I don't know what the next big wave of artistic revenue is going to be, but artist will get paid. For example, I have all of my personal artwork on the Internet. I haven't received a dime for it. No one buys the prints, no one clicks the ads on my Blog (http://www.wolflog.com/), but I don't really care. I'm creating the artwork because I enjoy it. I receive small commissions here-and-there and that's it. It's not glamorous...and my name will probably never be noticed in the art world, but I don't really care.
So, as an artist ignored by companies, who doesn't receive a huge cash influx from them. I say, screw the bastards. Maybe then, when the next form of payment for artists comes around, I'll actually receive some green.