Messages

8326

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 26, 2010, 12:32:40 AM »

Wow, just wow. So you missed all the other symbols of various other religions?

Are you obtuse? (2 points for those who get that reference) Yes, I saw it. I get it. The camera focused on that stained glass window for roughly 13 minutes. They didn't make the religious symbolism and references a secret. There was just a lot more Jesus in the finale. What is so hard to understand about that? I didn't see big, in your face Yin and Yang symbols sprinkled throughout the episode. I didn't like director Jack Bender force feeding me all that Jesus, front and center in all those scenes, especially when the writers already wrote it into the dialog and plot. That's no longer subliminal let alone subtle. That's "Here's Jesus. Don't you get it yet? No, here he is again." Maybe that was the point; I just didn't like it. That's not artistic, it's obnoxious. It appeals to the lowest common denominator, for people too dense to get it any other way. Disagree? Fine. Don't treat me like I'm an idiot. I'm just saying, not my thing.

8327

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 25, 2010, 06:34:18 PM »

Jesus references? The church that everyone was gathered in had symbols from various religions and it never favored one religion over another. It would be wrong for the show to detach itself from from the faith/spirituality aspects since that was a theme from the very beginning. Really I think you are reaching to say it had "Jesus" references. Religious references? Definitely. Eko was probably the most Christian character they had and he died quite awhile back.

Really? How many shots of that big statue of Jesus were there in the finale? If it's more than 1, it's too many. It wasn't even in the background. The statue was right in front of the camera so I don't think I'm reaching at all.

8328

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 24, 2010, 10:03:01 PM »

I'm actually glad they didn't flat out say what The Island was. That'd be like explaining Silent Hill.

And I beg to differ regarding Miles. He spent 3 years in Dharmaville with Sawyer, Juliet, Jin, and (kind of) Faraday, who was also MIA from the final scene. Miles had to mean something to some of them. Also, I thought there was no Michael in the final scene because he's still trapped on The Island, punishment or serving time for killing Ana Lucia and Libby, even though he died postponing the Kahana from exploding sooner, saving many of them. It just seemed like the final scene was poorly planned.

All in all, I liked the ending, but it wasn't great. Fitting but kind of cheap. The whole "We can't answer everything" line isn't a free get out jail card. They wrote the show, they wrote themselves into those dead ends and ultimately that's poor storytelling. So I only buy that excuse to a certain degree. For the most part, I didn't mind letting go of some of those nagging questions. However, others I was like "Really, not going to touch on that?" They did bring back Juliet (who seemed ridiculously tall the entire episode for some reason) so that was about all I needed to enjoy the finale.

The only things I absolutely detested were all the Jesus references. It wasn't even subtle. I'm not anti-religion, I just felt like it was heavy handed.

My favorite line: "You're not John Locke. You disrespect his memory by wearing his face, but you're nothing like him. It turns out he was right about most everything. I just wish I could have told him that while he was still alive."

8329

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo may charge for online?

« on: May 23, 2010, 12:05:16 AM »

What happens if someone knows that they are only gonna play the game a few days?

If people know they are only going to play a game for a few days, they clearly know the consequences. They would have to pay full price, but the choice is theirs to make. No one is forcing them to make that purchase so it's not fair to displace blame in this instance. Same goes for DLC. I refuse to pay for DLC because I think the entire concept is bullsh*t. Most paid DLC I either can live without or think should have been included. I've yet to purchase any DLC because I understand the risk. If the new content is stupid or if I trade-in the game, I know I can't trade back the extra content. That would be no one's fault but my own. That's on me.

8330

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 21, 2010, 01:16:44 AM »

Actually I think the hold outs are the ones waiting for a deal(not so much because they can't afford it, but because they can't quite justify the purchase yet), and they have waited so long, that once the new hardware gets announced at a price they find affordable, it becomes justifiable as 2 devices for the price of 1.

It's been out for over 5 years. If people haven't justified the purchase by now and it's "not so much because they can't afford it," what are they waiting for? I can only assume it's the price since Nintendo hasn't dropped it in like 4 years.

adrock: i was talking to BnM... that's why i quoted him... and also it turns out that the Tegra 2 in the Zune uses ARM 11 so I was mistaken and Nvidia needs to update their website lol

Fair enough. He was originally responding to me so I guess I thought you were referring to me by extension. Also, I believe the Zune HD uses a first generation Tegra chip. I don't think anything officially uses Tegra 2 yet.

8331

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 20, 2010, 10:08:26 PM »

A person is more likely to buy a 3DS early if they can trade in their DS and continue playing their DS games on the 3DS.

A DS Lite has a $30 trade in value right now at Gamestop. That's only going to decrease, especially since Gamestop knows 3DS is coming...

Thankfully Nintendo doesn't agree with you since the 3DS '''will''' be backwards compatible with the DS.

I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Dude, seriously? /facepalm

As for Halo 2, even in February of this year there was thousands of   people playing Halo 2 online at any given time.

Click me

Also, the Tegra 2 uses ARM 9:

I know. I own a Zune HD. I've read up on the specs. That doesn't automatically make Tegra compatible with DS.... Nintendo would have to commission Nvidia to make it work which, while probably not difficult, still costs money. The idea is to not spend that money.

Lastly: Nintendo already confirmed bc... its the only OTHER thing we know about 3DS than its 3Dness

I just want to make it clear to everyone that I'm merely bringing up a hypothetical situation here and I fully expect there to be 2 screens and BC.

...

I'm not trying to start a big debate over this. I just wanted to see people's thoughts on this what-if scenario.

/facepalm

BC adds value to upgrading without devaluing (or shelving) your current collection of games. Not to mention lets teh hold-outs play catch up on all the games they missed without buying old hardware.

You're paying for something you already have. You're not devaluing or shelving your current collection at all because you already have the hardware needed to play those games. Otherwise, why would you even own those games to begin with? You would just have an extra device to play them on. And the hold-outs held out for a reason. If they weren't going to pay $130 for a DS Lite, what makes you think they're going to pay even more for a 3DS to play DS games? I imagine hold-outs hold out due to price so no matter how amazing 3DS may be, most aren't biting. They're more likely to buy a used DS or a new freshly price cut DS to play DS games while holding out on 3DS.

8332

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 20, 2010, 06:27:16 PM »

Compelling software and even the early adopter syndrome sells hardware. Backwards compatibility is not a huge motivator; it's an extra. How many people were motivated to buy the Wii because it could play Gamecube games? That's ridiculous. Thank Wii Sports and Twilight Princess. No one is kicking down Sony's door to reinstate 2 whole generation's worth of backwards compatibility in PS3 and games are still released on PS2. So, I don't think you can make that claim. People buy new hardware primarily on the merits of the system itself, not its ability to play legacy games. It's a nice feature, sure, but it's hardly a deal breaker. Since I already own a DSi, I'd take a cheaper, smaller 3DS if Nintendo ditched backwards compatibility. In every backwards compatibility enabled console's life, there comes a point when people stop caring about it. By the time Microsoft cut Halo 2 from Xbox Live, like 7 people were still playing it.

Additionally, I kind of feel like backwards compatibility encourages laziness. New hardware is rushed out the door with minimal games because the idea is that people can play their old games. Sony PR'd the f*ck out of that in 2000 and it's still bullsh*t. PS2 had a god awful launch. So did DS. People will still have the old systems. Or they should and thus will still be able to play the old games. They could get $20 in trade-in value, but then you encourage used hardware/software sales and lose money that way. Launch with a brand new Super Mario game then see how much people give a damn about old DS games. Even if backwards compatibility is there, Nintendo should be giving people a legitimate reason to buy 3DS, not a more expensive DS for a while until the real 3DS games come out.

8333

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 20, 2010, 01:54:26 AM »

The fate of The Island will be decided as it should be.... in MORTAL KOMBAT!

/queue techno music

Jack and Locke use their Animalities.

That's how I envisioned Lost ending. It's the only logical way to end the series...

8334

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 20, 2010, 01:50:43 AM »

I just want to make it clear to everyone that I'm merely bringing up a hypothetical situation here and I fully expect there to be 2 screens and BC.

From what we know of Nintendo Handheld history (it will be ARM based), we could reasonably say that removing DS BC from 3DS would be like removing GC BC from Wii.

So many different chipsets are ARM based so I don't think that necessarily suggests easy compatibility. Considering we don't know what 3DS is packing, a comparison to Gamecube and Wii isn't fair. Broadway was built off of Gekko. If we are to assume 3DS uses Tegra 2, the analogy falls apart. Nvidia didn't create the Tegra family off of DS blueprints. There's bound to be some compatibility issues and if it came down to it, Nintendo should choose the future in 3DS over maintaining compatibility with old hardware.

Don't forget that they've already patented forward/backward compatible cards and confirmed that it will be BC.
They've also "codenamed" the system 3DS which would lead me to believe that it has the same form factor as the DS since they are both in the same family of handhelds.

For argument's sake, think of how many patents are unused. Additionally, until the hardware is finalized, Nintendo could strip the 3DS of anything. On a much smaller scale, look at the Gamecube controller.

I'm not trying to start a big debate over this. I just wanted to see people's thoughts on this what-if scenario. I don't think people would really miss backwards compatibility. People would balk and move on. Additionally, the 2 screens aren't really what made DS. The touch screen was far more important and I feel like most DS games could have been reworked to use one larger screen.

8335

Nintendo Gaming / Re: NBA JAM - BOOOOOOM-SHAKA-LAKA - He's On FIRE!!!!!

« on: May 19, 2010, 08:08:36 PM »

Unlockable Celebs Will Return to NBA Jam

Yay! Okay, instant buy now.

8336

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 19, 2010, 08:00:54 PM »

They only seem to remove backwards compatibility when it becomes unreasonable (like a media switch from carts to disc with N64 and GC) or when it just gets very old (no GB/GBC on DS, no GBA on DSi).

Yeah...

I guess one could argue age as a factor and Nintendo didn't rid new hardware of backwards compatibility until those older platforms have been long abandoned. DS is still kicking.

8337

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 19, 2010, 07:55:04 PM »

Well, couldn't you do that with one large touchscreen? Just saying...

And Nintendo has slowly been stripping away backwards compatibility. Gameboy Micro and DS couldn't play Gameboy/Gameboy Color games. DSi shed the GBA slot. I guess one could argue age as a factor and Nintendo didn't rid new hardware of backwards compatibility until those older platforms have been long abandoned. DS is still kicking. At the same time, it's not like Nintendo never promised/announced something that they never delivered. Wii DVD dongle comes to mind. Not the same thing, but still...

I always viewed backwards compatibility as a luxury rather than a necessity. See, I've always held onto my legacy systems so backwards compatibility was never an issue for me. It's convenient, but I like keeping my old systems. Yes, I realize that not everyone does. However, I think Nintendo would be just fine without it.

I don't see any positives for Nintendo to remove BC from the 3DS.

Here's a positive: cuts costs which, hopefully, gets passed to the consumer. The 3DS chipset either needs to be compatible or must emulate legacy DS games. It'd just be much easier and cost efficient for Nintendo to just put a Tegra 2 in there and call it a day. I'm just playing devil's advocate. DS has reached a saturation point where people's DS's have their own DS's. Ditching backwards compatibility won't hurt anyone in the long run. Nintendo could easily get away with it. People would pissed off for like a month before they forget it's gone.

8338

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 19, 2010, 07:13:08 PM »

Also, what if 3DS only has one screen?

I think full backwards compatibility with DS kinda rules that out.

I don't think Nintendo ever said there would be 2 screens. I think we all just assume it will. I mean, it probably will. I was just postulating a fun theory. What would Nintendo really lose if they ditched backwards compatibility? That's a serious question. I'm curious what people think.

8339

General Gaming / Re: Sony Says: Apple is the Arrogant one.... Not Us (anymore)!!

« on: May 19, 2010, 07:04:19 PM »

Both companies are senselessly arrogant. Apple cultists simply drink more of their brand's Kool-Aid.

I'm going to be honest with you, dude. Apple's profit margins are ridiculous, but this Macbook Pro (my first Apple product ever) is still the best computer I've ever owned. I don't regret the money I spent at all. OSX is the best operating system I've ever used and I'm bootcamping Windows 7 (also awesome, just not as awesome).

It's funny how arrogant he is by claiming not to be arrogant. It's like someone bragging that they are modest.

Yeah... that's about right. Still, I'll give them this: Sony managed to hold their own despite f*cking up worse than Nintendo ever did. I don't even know how they managed that.

8340

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 19, 2010, 06:54:03 PM »

Yeah, Ben doesn't want The Island. He wants Alex back, which he can't have, and he was reminded again here that he should have chosen her over The Island 3 years ago. I thought the writers did a good job of that without flat out saying it. I mean, he also kills Widmore saying, "He doesn't get to save his daughter." Subtext. It worked here really well. And I thought the Man in Black offered Ben The Island because he doesn't need it once he escapes. He needs Ben to kill the next guardian like he needed Ben to kill Jacob, but using Desmond to destroy The Island probably still allows him to escape. I didn't mind the ambiguity here because the writers are clearly going to explain this in the final episode... right?

Anyway, I get the impression that Jack being The Island's new guardian is a red herring. He's either going to give up the position to someone else (Ben) or find a way for The Island to no longer need a guardian (destroy the Smoke Monster/trap him on the island forever). If there's a little bit of the Source in each person, maybe the point is for people to regain whatever it is, thus negating the purpose of The Island and its need for a guardian. What if Lost was never about a bunch of people lost and stranded on an island, but about something that humanity lost? Weird.

8341

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 18, 2010, 10:49:29 PM »

From what I've read, Nvidia is really banking on the Tegra line which is probably especially true considering their rift with Intel. I'm sure Nvidia would LOVE for Nintendo use the Tegra 2 and almost single-handedly save them. I mean, really, how many people besides me bought a Zune HD? I would love for Nintendo to use Tegra 2. The first generation Tegra is pretty impressive tech and Tegra 2 probably blows it out of the water.

Also, what if 3DS only has one screen?

8342

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 18, 2010, 01:58:05 AM »

I actually liked that Adam and Eve scene with the flashbacks. I thought it was done well artistically and thematically. I've read that a lot of fans felt like the flashback to season one was cheap, but I got the impression that people were missing the point. I thought it was an interesting way to bring things full circle. It highlighted the opposition between Locke and Jack, faith vs. science.

Anyway, I think the writers wrote themselves into a position where information is spoon fed to the audience in order to advance the plot when, with better planning, could have been revealed in a better, more clever way. There's a lot of stalling, a lot of false starts and, thus far, abandoned subplots. Again, I ask what exactly did Ilana add to the show. An interesting character with a loaded backstory, but nothing else. Ab Aeterno was one of the best episodes of the series, but for the 9th episode of the final season, it spent a lot of time telling the audience like 3 things. 1. Richard came to The Island on The Black Rock. 2. Jacob made it so Richard doesn't age. 3. A metaphor attempting to explain what the island. I don't need to be spoon fed information. However, I would like enough information in order to draw a logical conclusion, not 5 logical conclusions. And this has been said before, but not everything needs an explanation but I am a little confused over the priority the writers are giving certain mysteries. It was nice to know who Adam and Eve were, but ultimately, there are more pressing matters.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a big fan of the show and for the most part, they've done well in almost every aspect of the show. However, I feel like some things are being handled poorly which is normal. The writing is spotty in places. Big deal. It's still better written than most shows on currently on TV. RIP Wonderfalls.

8343

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 17, 2010, 06:53:54 PM »

Again, the necessity to come to conclusions by making logical connections between pieces of information doesn't mean the show isn't answering the questions - it means the show assumes its viewers are smart enough to figure things out without their hands being held! That, to me, is extremely refreshing. I'm very satisfied with the extent to which they are answering most of these questions.

Ehh, I disagree. This goes back to our discussion of subtext. Several logical conclusions can be made based on the information provided by the show. Those aren't answers; they're assumptions. For example, Tom Friendly never explicitly says he's gay, but there was enough evidence to come to that conclusion. Not that it matters in the grand scheme of the show or a anything because it doesn't. I'm just using it as an example where subtext is used correctly in helping the viewer come to a single conclusion.

I think it's clear that Jacob meant for 815 to crash, given that he visited a bunch of the passengers before the flight and that he had their names on a big list. Jacob has magical powers so it's extremely feasible that he could have influenced the events that caused Desmond to miss pushing the button. This is an ASSUMPTION I'm making, yes, but I think it's completely reasonable, and having enough information to make reasonable assumptions like that really should be enough!

But, see, I can make a completely different and still reasonable assumption with the same information. What exactly got answered? Nothing. Seems to me like the writers were trying to cover their tracks and did a bad job of it. The show explicitly states that Desmond caused the crash. Kelvin Inman was secretly fixing Libby's boat, The Elizabeth, and was planning on leaving Desmond on The Island to press the button. Desmond missed pressing the button because he was following Inman, eventually killing him accidentally. Nothing about that suggests Jacob had anything to do with it, especially since we know he's not responsible for the excessive amounts of electromagnetism on The Island. Saying "Uhh, Jacob has magical powers and somehow had something to do with the crash" is cheap and, frankly, just not good enough. That's like how Metal Gear Solid 4 explained almost EVERYTHING with nanomachines. If we can just chalk every mystery up to being magic, why even bother watching the show? Some things are okay to be left up to interpretation simply. Some things are not.

8344

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo pre-empts April Fools Day - Official Nintendo 3DS announcement megaton

« on: May 17, 2010, 06:03:21 PM »

Regarding the screens, I have a feeling the one is a placeholder since only one of the screens will be 3D which is lame. It doesn't make much sense for there to be 2 different sized screens considering quite of few DS games switch screens depending on the situation which I suppose would still be possible, just inconvenient and disorienting. I was hoping that both screens would be 3D, touch enabled, and would form one larger screen when opened completely. Silly me.

It's not even confirmed to be part of the 3DS, it's just speculatio.

Holy sh*t, you just legitimately responded to a NinGurl69 *huggles post. How did this happen? Don't you know how this works by now?

8345

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 17, 2010, 05:53:28 PM »

They took Walt for the same reason they take children in general, which is the same reason Mother took the two babies in the last episode - to mold them into being a potential "protector" of the island. That's the whole reason the Others are there at all - Jacob brings them there because he is looking for someone to take over as the island's protector. I think that is exceedingly clear at this point.

Assumed, not understood. In fact, most of the things you've said are assumptions based on partial facts the shows provides. No offense intended. I mean, you may be right, but since there's there are so few concrete answers given on the show, they don't really count as answers.

Why was everyone brought to the island? Jacob brought them there in his search for a replacement. IT'S BEEN ANSWERED.

Might be part of it. On a few occasions, it's been said or suggested that Jacob brings people to the island to prove the Man in Black wrong about the nature of man who Jacob believes are inherently good. And one could argue who's really responsible for bringing the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815 to the island. It's assumed (there's the word again) that Jacob caused the storm that brought the Black Rock and Richard Alpert to The Island. However, Desmond caused Flight 815 to crash by failing to press the button on time in The Swan station. As of yet, it hasn't be revealed if Jacob and Desmond ever met so Jacob has no influence over Desmond.

8346

General Gaming / Re: PSP2 - It's coming and we know it

« on: May 15, 2010, 07:30:57 PM »

Point being?

Nintendo handhelds didn't offer anything new besides portability until DS. I don't think it's fair to jump on Sony for offering a portable console experience when Nintendo did the same thing for like 15 years, unless, of course, you're willing to chastise Nintendo as well. Sure, Nintendo did it better/smarter, but that's not really the point here. Kytim89 questioned the notion of paying for a portable PS2 when he already owns an actual PS2, not the merits of PSP as a handheld system. I'm not defending PSP's shortcomings. Like I said earlier, I consider it a home console as I'm never too far away from an outlet when I use it. Rather, I'm defending PSP as a system with worthwhile games. I didn't buy one until last year when I deemed there to be enough games worthy of purchasing new hardware that wasn't available elsewhere.

8347

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 15, 2010, 07:02:21 PM »

Well, you can apply that logic to anything, but that doesn't stop people from wanting answers. You might not mind, but clearly, millions of other people do...

And most of those questions haven't been answered. Kind of, but not really.

Honestly, the only thing I really want from the last 2 episodes is for the series to end with a logical conclusion, even if it's not ideal for the characters. Not every story needs a happy ending, but every story needs an appropriate ending, else the audience feels cheated. That said, I'm sure most people will not be satisfied with the ending of Lost because the writers didn't explain every last detail or mystery (and they won't). I think that's the wrong approach and those people are setting themselves up for disappointment. Every great story leaves something unexplained, but still tells you what you need to know.

8348

General Gaming / Re: PSP2 - It's coming and we know it

« on: May 15, 2010, 04:14:24 PM »

N64 didn't have a touchscreen, wifi, or a built-in microphone (Hey You! Pikachu doesn't count) or cameras if you count DSi.

8349

General Chat / Re: Lost

« on: May 15, 2010, 03:04:13 PM »

I agree, but that's like asking water not to be wet. Lost is full of unanswered questions, many of which don't matter. However, I think fans have grown tired with the writers' whack-a-mole approach, where they answer one question by posing 3 more. That was fine in the middle of the show's run because a show like Lost revolves around the mysteries it presents, but with 2 episodes left, it seems pointless. I kind of got the impression that the writers were unsure of the show's direction in middle of Season 3. It seemed like they finally realized that they had to start organizing all the questions and mysteries they presented in preparation of the eventual conclusion of the show while also continuing the narrative. That's a tough order, but they did write themselves into a whole on a number of occasions. Not every question needs an answer, but it's also not the viewer's fault that the writers posed so many. That said, I felt like the writers spent a lot of time dicking around. Rose and Bernard did nothing for their entire time on the show except be annoying. While I liked Charlotte and Lapidus, they did nothing. Ilana did nothing except have big boobs and run around. Seriously, what was the point of introducing a character so late in the series' run who poses more questions than she answers? I, personally, don't really mind because I literally started watching Lost in February of this year and Hulu'd the entire series so I didn't invest as much of my life as others have but I can imagine how frustrating it must be for longtime fans who feel they're getting jerked around by the writers' lack of focus.

8350

General Gaming / Re: PSP2 - It's coming and we know it

« on: May 15, 2010, 05:57:05 AM »

Why fork over the cash for the device when I already have it in my roo and it is called the PS2.

This was Nintendo pre-DS. Gameboy was just a handheld monochrome NES. GBA was a handheld SNES sans X and Y. If you take issue with PSP being a handheld PS2, I wonder if you've ever owned any Gameboy iteration in your life. If so, I'm not sure I buy that you won't own a Sony handheld because of its identity. It sounds like you don't like it because it's made by Sony which, of course, you're perfectly entitled to.

I bought a PSP once it finally had games I wanted that I couldn't get anywhere else. I could get God of War on PS2, but not Chains of Olympus so I justified buying a PSP for it. For me, games make hardware worth purchasing. While I bought my brother an Xbox 360, I wouldn't buy one for myself. Outside of Gears of War which I only enjoy playing co-op with my brother, there is nothing on it I want that I can't also get on PS3... and PS3 has God of War III and a Blu-Ray drive. The choice, for me, was simple.