Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Svevan

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66
1
TalkBack / Re: New Zelda in the Works With More Mature Link
« on: June 02, 2009, 10:03:08 PM »
I'm confused. Did the "small sampling of artwork" reveal the "older and more mature" look for Link?

If so, what is meant by "older and more mature?" When I hear "older and more mature" I think, I don't know, 40s - 60s. What are we comparing "older and more mature" to? The last Zelda game, where he was 17? That could mean Link in his late 20s, early 30s. But if we're simply applying "older and more mature" to the range of ages Link has ever been (10 to 17) then that means Link is going to be 17 again. Which makes this not news, at all.

2
TalkBack / Re: EA Sports Active Blog: Day 2
« on: May 24, 2009, 02:11:14 PM »
Jonny: I like the length of your blogs; they're functioning as both daily "experience" blogs and as a comprehensive software review. I was considering picking this up, so I appreciate the info.

3
Stale Jokes / Re: Poll: Radiohead Song
« on: September 22, 2008, 11:43:49 AM »
Yeah I picked No Surprises too, but there are some major omissions: Pyramid Song, You and Whose Army?, The Tourist, Nude, Reckoner, and anything from Hail to the Thief (I suggest I Will (No Man's Land)). I am also a huge fan of both Morning Bells and The National Anthem.

aw **** it it's all hella awesome.

4
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 13, 2008, 05:01:48 PM »
Which episode? I haven't seen a good Simpsons episode since 1999.

5
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 12, 2008, 12:55:39 PM »
Yeah, AFAIK it's pretty much identical no matter where you see it. I think when they do their big tour (instead of these "permanent" big-city shows) they do new stuff, or at least that's what I read on Wiki.

6
Stale Jokes / Re: Random poll of the week: Jim Carrey
« on: September 11, 2008, 11:41:26 PM »
Of all the **** that Ron Howard has left on this Earth, The Grinch is the smelliest.

Hostile, there's no way for you to get away with not defending your Dumb and Dumber pick.

7
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 11, 2008, 07:02:06 PM »
I've seen Blue Man Group twice in Chicago, but not in a very long time.  Do they still do the toilet paper thing at the end?

yes

8
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 08, 2008, 11:59:41 AM »
Maybe next visit, when I roll in with my homies, my bling, and my dollar dollar bills. This year I was budgeted for museums, shows, and lots of fucking walking.

9
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 07, 2008, 03:41:37 PM »
Blue Man Group spoilers....

Quote
Although, heh, Wandering, uh, hate to break it to you...but those two things are very scripted events. Both happened at my performance as well. YET I do agree with you, that the Blue Men are quite adept at dealing with the audience members' natural reactions (as when they pulled a girl onstage and ate "dinner" with her. She could not in any way have been an actor. She was truly awkward but desperately trying to play along, to make sure she got it right. At least, if she was an actor, she was the best actor I've ever seen ever. EVER.).

What!? At the end of the show, we asked the band if the free bird thing was planned, and they said no.

Also, the girl who ate dinner in our show was equally awkward....
Spoilers end.

Yeah, I was sitting in prime seats right in front of the control booth (in the Venetian Hotel's "Blue Man Theatre," specially designed for this show), and I'm pretty sure I heard the guy yell "Freebird" from inside the control booth. Or else it was a recording played from a speaker in the nosebleed section, specially timed. Dunno. I suppose it's possible that your show (wherever you saw it) was the very first time someone ever yelled Freebird at the band, and they incorporated it into the show every time after, but it's much more likely that the band was lying to you.

Here's how the "guy with chocolates" thing worked at my show. First, the Blue Man took the box of chocolates from one guy, who was AFAIK a real audience member, gave them to another guy, and had the second guy throw them into his mouth (as had been done earlier in the show). Then the Blue Man put all the chocolates from his mouth onto the second guy's hand, and returned the box to the first guy. THEN, while the other Blue Men began to do something else, two members of the Blue Man Crew came up and took the box of chocolates away from guy one, and gave a napkin to guy two. So the chocolates, it seems to me, were planted, but the two audience members were not. Makes me wonder if the people in the "late arrival" gag were plants, or the girl at dinner, or wathavyu.

I thought the show was great all around, but lemme just say that there was a bit too much product placement (though the show is slightly critical of advertising and consumerism) and a bit too many mouth gags. If I were the second guy in the chocolate sketch, I would have thrown up right there on the spot. People catching things in their mouths is fine, but spewing them out, even onto a canvas? Yuck. And the Cap'n Crunch that they spit everywhere, ugh. A bit gross. I know that this is just me, but I HATE spit and things that were once in your mouth but now are out again. I suppose it is funny that Blue Man Group, while ostensibly being a performance art revue, is very critical of the stuff that passes for art today.
Actually, I think I'll blog about this.

10
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 07, 2008, 01:49:28 AM »
I totally loved the show, quite a lot of fun and very interesting post-postmodern concept (or anti-postmodern, don't know).

Although, heh, Wandering, uh, hate to break it to you...but those two things are very scripted events. Both happened at my performance as well. YET I do agree with you, that the Blue Men are quite adept at dealing with the audience members' natural reactions (as when they pulled a girl onstage and ate "dinner" with her. She could not in any way have been an actor. She was truly awkward but desperately trying to play along, to make sure she got it right. At least, if she was an actor, she was the best actor I've ever seen ever. EVER.).

edit: Wandering guilted me into spoiler-tagging. Whatever.

11
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 07, 2008, 12:43:03 AM »
Yeah I dig it! Everything here is posing as classy, which is good enough for me. Where I come from we don't take the time even to pose.

Just saw Blue Man Group. That show is crazy.

12
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 06, 2008, 12:42:44 PM »
AHEM, I'm staying with my mother who is living here temporarily, so my flight and "hotel" (really an RV) are free. I'm just paying for some exhibits.

13
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 06, 2008, 12:14:43 PM »
I like Trek more than a little, but the price tag is a little steep, and my time is severely limited.

Already I've gone to the top of the (half-scale) Eiffel Tower, seen the beautiful indoor decor of The Bellagio (where much of Ocean's 11 was filmed), The Venetian, and The Paris, and gone to an art show in The Bellagio called "American Modernism," where I got to see some beautiful Georgia O'Keeffe and Max Weber paintings up close. Today I may visit the Art Museum and see some Basquiat, Warhol, et al, visit The New York hotel/casino, maybe visit a Salvador Dali exhibit, and maybe see The Blue Man Group. Tomorrow I'm hoping for the Hoover Dam, and some relaxing times on the lake.

Last night I spent 45 minutes just watching the Bellagio Fountain show, which is really, weirdly, beautiful.

14
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 06, 2008, 01:58:46 AM »
Contrary to what you may think, I'm not dumb. Ergo, I'm not gambling.

15
General Chat / Re: I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 06, 2008, 01:08:02 AM »
This sounds like a good idea! ....which game?

16
General Chat / I am in Las Vegas
« on: September 06, 2008, 12:25:21 AM »
Any NWR-ers here?

17
TalkBack / Re: RE: Nintendo World Report is Hiring!
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:08:59 PM »
I get neither, maybe I should apply...

18
TalkBack / Re: RE: Nintendo World Report is Hiring!
« on: September 01, 2008, 01:47:49 PM »
That's a funny joke. How much is NWR paying nowadays?

19
General Gaming / Re: The Best Cooperative Games
« on: September 01, 2008, 01:45:56 PM »
I don't think I would use Gears of War as being designed for co-op.  Halo 1 and especially Halo 2 are similar games and designed for coop first.  The main vehicile is the warthog that basically requires two people to be good and there are tons of sections with mutliple vantage points and other parts that are designed to have players work together to attack.
The only real difference in Gears is that the second player is actually part of the story and the game Brute Force for original xbox already took care of that.  Every mission in that game was made for mutliple characters even if you were alone so you would have to postion the computer AI in ambush locations, good vantage points, or have them use their abilities at certain times.  Gears did nothing new in the coop front to deserve a mention on this list of coop games.

The battletech game I was thinking of is called Battletech.  It is for the Genesis and two players contolled a mech from an overhead perspective, one moving it and the other aiming in whatever direction they want and shooting.

I guess, then, the only real difference between Halo and Gears is that the one of them is fun to play.

Gameplay innovation or no, Gears' feels in every way like a two player game, while Halo, no matter how hard they try, is a multiplayer combat game (co-op is fun but not great). I think this has to do with level design, and the way enemies spawn until their holes are destroyed, and the various branching paths. I've never played Brute Force, but only someone who's played both can comment on the implementation of these gameplay elements, rather than who did them first. Who came first is only half the story.

For that reason, I think WoW is the MMO to mention, esp. because it attempts to work also as a single player experience despite the fact that the entire genre is built on cooperative interaction. It's an interesting formula (and I don't know much about it), and its the complete opposite of Everquest (which I played a lot), which for most race/class combos was impossible to play "solo" past level 10-15.

20
General Gaming / Re: The Best Cooperative Games
« on: September 01, 2008, 12:20:03 PM »
Gunstar Heroes Gunstar Heroes Gunstar Heroes (though it probably slots in right next to Contra)

I know this subject is taboo around here, but there's no denying that the major co-op genre today is MMOs. Ultima Online, Everquest, WoW, all should be mentioned in some manner, since they are entirely about cooperation, and in some cases are UNPLAYABLE without it.

edit: second Gears of War, which is made entirely for co-op

also, what about accidental co-op games, like Odama and Trauma Center Wii?

21
and the stories for the paper mario games are never more than derivative. Super Mario RPG wins on that round, methinks.

22
This sounds like a waste of time because it is, and you can't even do that right, lightweight.

Deg's entire posting career is made up of [nearly, and sometimes out right] rule-breaking name-calling like this, almost always directed towards Ian. I don't care how ridiculous Ian can be, maybe you're the problem, not him?

23
General Chat / Re: Comic Books
« on: August 24, 2008, 05:48:56 PM »
The sequel is horrible and in someplaces totally contradicts the "moral of the story" from The Dark Knight.

Okay....what would you say is the "moral" of Dark Knight Returns?

Thanks for the suggestions (Shy and everyone), I'll follow up on them as much as I can.

24
General Chat / Re: Comic Books
« on: August 24, 2008, 05:47:27 PM »
read Tintin.

NOW

ha ha, don't worry! I read every single one when I was a kid. I'm just buying them now as an adult so I can share them with my nephew and (eventually) my kids.

25
General Chat / Re: Watchmen
« on: August 24, 2008, 01:05:23 AM »
So I finally read The Dark Knight Returns as recommended by ShyGuy (got it in the mail today and ate it up!) - I thought it was really good DRAMATICALLY, and I love having it on my shelf next to Watchmen (totally agree, Shy, about the connections between the two works), but I'm not sure I can get behind the implicit moralization of Batman in this story (similar to the film "The Dark Knight"). I think Miller's romanticization of the vigilante, and his moral equivocations about doing evil for the sake of doing good are all vaguely distasteful - is that what I'm supposed to feel? This is Batman after all, am I supposed to hate him as much as I did after reading this book? Sure I admire the guy (even love him), and can totally sympathize with his split personality, but in the end Batman seems to take a forgiving attitude towards The Sons of Batman and The Mutants, while completely dismissing the police and government for "failing" at their duty.

I recently watched a film that brought up similar thoughts called "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp." It's a British film about a General who feels satisfied when the British womp the Germans after WWI because the British used "good honest soldiering" in the face of Germany's underhanded tactics. Yet he is forced to rethink his ideals by the end of the film (as WWII begins and "good honest soldiering" just isn't cutting it anymore), and though I might agree that new kinds of enemies = new kinds of warfare, I don't think calling something "supremely evil," over and above every other thing, justifies any and all forms of force. After all, isn't that what Hitler did? It seems every Batman story (all the films, plus this and Year One) start with a depiction of Gotham City as the single most terrible place EVER. Like, Fallujah or Beirut or something. The evil there is so overwhelming that normal crime-fighting just can't help, and "desperate measures" are called for. I have a friend who says he sympathizes more with Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men every time he watches it. Personally, I get sick to my stomach every time he says that.

Let's tie this back to Watchmen, where Rorschach is perhaps given the status of hero, yet he is Batman-esque in his willingness to do violence for the "greater good." (He's also 100% less appealing as a character.) Yet at the end he REJECTS Veidt's plan to do violence against New York because for him TRUTH is far more important than convenience. Similar to modern debates we have about "enhanced interrogation" (and I say this just for reference, not to make a moral claim about the current debates on "torture" or to begin a discussion. I'm just saying it's related*).

*and more than a little interesting that Frank Miller (who wrote DKR, not Watchmen) supported the War in Iraq as a retaliatory action for 9/11 (I'M JUST SAYING!).

Also, as a final note, the trailer for Watchmen looks like total suck. I'll probably go see it opening weekend, but mang, it's really too bad it looks like 300 + Superheroes.

Rechristening this the generic Comic Books thread. In a little while I may bring up Scott McCloud, Maurice Sendak, Tintin, and some others. I'm on a comics kick right now, taking suggestions! I just bought Maus, am looking to dive into Daniel Clowes, some Chester Brown, some Osamu Tezuka (probably Buddha), some Dave Sim, Eisner, Satrapi, etc.

Also, Shy, after reading DKR, I really really really want to read the sequel. Can I please have your permission?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66