1201
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
« on: April 01, 2011, 05:44:40 PM »
I'd go in halves with you on Twin Peaks...
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.
1202
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Sci-Fi Edition
« on: April 01, 2011, 04:25:43 PM »
Sci-fi shows are unfortunately rather expensive to make, due to make-up, specialized sets, and obligatory special effects. Top that off with the requirement of a good writing team, and the genre doesn't look very appealing to most producers. Sci-fi appeals to so few people, that it's never been a very profitable business to be in. It requires a fanbase that is not only imaginative enough to appreciate the lofty settings, but also intelligent enough to grasp the more serious plots and real world allusions. Not a lot of people like that make up your general television audience. 
As you point out, a premium channel would have a good chance. I've never watched the Stargate series, personally. It seems that given the niche appeal and budget constraints however, that'd be the place for good sci-fi nowadays.
Actually, I've recently taken to gathering up older sci-fi shows that I missed out on during their original runs. They may not equal up to the Star Trek and X-files episodes that I was busying myself with at the time, but most of them have been good enough to watch through now that the genre is being largely ignored.
Would. Not. Watch.
I'm a huge Trekkie, but absolutely hated that last film. It was everything Star Trek shouldn't be. It was all flash and action, with no real exploration or intelligence. It was Star Trek trying to be Star Wars in an attempt to trade one aging fanbase in for a newer, younger, easier to please one.
As you point out, a premium channel would have a good chance. I've never watched the Stargate series, personally. It seems that given the niche appeal and budget constraints however, that'd be the place for good sci-fi nowadays.
Actually, I've recently taken to gathering up older sci-fi shows that I missed out on during their original runs. They may not equal up to the Star Trek and X-files episodes that I was busying myself with at the time, but most of them have been good enough to watch through now that the genre is being largely ignored.
Can a new Star Trek series, based off the newest movie work?
Would. Not. Watch.
I'm a huge Trekkie, but absolutely hated that last film. It was everything Star Trek shouldn't be. It was all flash and action, with no real exploration or intelligence. It was Star Trek trying to be Star Wars in an attempt to trade one aging fanbase in for a newer, younger, easier to please one.
1203
Movies & TV / Re: Rate the last movie you've seen
« on: April 01, 2011, 03:09:19 PM »
The director's cut aren't nearly as dramatic or necessary with Wrath of Khan or Undiscovered Country. In fact, about the only change I recall from Wrath of Khan was a little more extrapolation with Scottie's nephew. Still, I don't see any reason why the director's cuts shouldn't become the standard, especially with TMP.
1205
Movies & TV / Re: Rate the last movie you've seen
« on: April 01, 2011, 11:14:20 AM »
Star Trek: The Motion Picture is really only worth watching if it's the Director's Cut.
Paramount would have been better off going with Phase II instead of converting it over into that film.
Paramount would have been better off going with Phase II instead of converting it over into that film.
1206
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Reality Edition
« on: March 31, 2011, 07:27:47 PM »
If I had one wish, it'd be to have the power of shapeshifting...
1207
General Chat / Re: Google's Quest for World Dominance
« on: March 31, 2011, 01:20:48 PM »
Exactly.
Most of these situations exist solely because local municipals gave exclusive rights to telephone and cable companies decades ago. Generally, it was expected to be a "fair" trade-off. Cable companies were given exclusive rights to a territory and in return they would build and run the infrastructure. The problem, of course, is that most of these companies have only done just enough to get by. There's no competition by law, so they don't really have anything to worry about. They can charge you and I outrageous fees, while providing bottom of the barrel service.
What's really frustrating however, is that they have received plenty of government funding throughout the years (even from a national level) to upgrade and expand services. It never happens though. Most companies even instate "rural access" fees, charging everyone a little extra so that they can provide service to "less profitable" areas... again though, they never do.
Most of these situations exist solely because local municipals gave exclusive rights to telephone and cable companies decades ago. Generally, it was expected to be a "fair" trade-off. Cable companies were given exclusive rights to a territory and in return they would build and run the infrastructure. The problem, of course, is that most of these companies have only done just enough to get by. There's no competition by law, so they don't really have anything to worry about. They can charge you and I outrageous fees, while providing bottom of the barrel service.
What's really frustrating however, is that they have received plenty of government funding throughout the years (even from a national level) to upgrade and expand services. It never happens though. Most companies even instate "rural access" fees, charging everyone a little extra so that they can provide service to "less profitable" areas... again though, they never do.
1208
TalkBack / Re: Pokémon Black and White Review
« on: March 31, 2011, 01:12:30 PM »
Nothing like playing the villain in a Pokemon game! Snatching critters out of their natural habitats, locking them up into little spheres, and then forcing them to fight one another to the point of exhaustion! Yet for some reason, Team Plasma are the bad guys?
I thought it was a little refreshing that all of the gyms were to close to one another. I never really felt as though there was a lot of "exploration" in previous games. Just a bunch of numbered routes with lines of trainers waiting to fight. I really like the fact that the game has been streamlined by focusing on story, placing nurses along routes, and combining PokeMarts and PokeCenters, etc. It make it feel more like a game and less like a grinding experience.
My big problems with the game were:
-The menu on the bottom screen is pretty awful. It pales in comparison to SoulSilver/HeartGold in terms of aesthetic appeal and functionality.
-The close-up Pokemon sprites are horribly jaggy around the edges. It's really only noticeable in fights, with YOUR Pokemon. Still, it's a problem that can be seen on the very first battle.
-My damn Pokemon don't visually follow behind me anymore! It's a small thing, but it actually added a bit of appeal to the last entries (Silver/Gold).
I thought it was a little refreshing that all of the gyms were to close to one another. I never really felt as though there was a lot of "exploration" in previous games. Just a bunch of numbered routes with lines of trainers waiting to fight. I really like the fact that the game has been streamlined by focusing on story, placing nurses along routes, and combining PokeMarts and PokeCenters, etc. It make it feel more like a game and less like a grinding experience.
My big problems with the game were:
-The menu on the bottom screen is pretty awful. It pales in comparison to SoulSilver/HeartGold in terms of aesthetic appeal and functionality.
-The close-up Pokemon sprites are horribly jaggy around the edges. It's really only noticeable in fights, with YOUR Pokemon. Still, it's a problem that can be seen on the very first battle.
-My damn Pokemon don't visually follow behind me anymore! It's a small thing, but it actually added a bit of appeal to the last entries (Silver/Gold).
1209
TalkBack / Re: The Sims 3 Review
« on: March 31, 2011, 01:04:03 PM »
The Sims 3 plays primarily like the previous two installments on the PC. The only noticeable difference is the terrible "real-time" world, where everything happens in your neighborhood regardless of whether or not you're playing the other families. It's a step down from The Sims 2 in a lot of ways. Of course, having to buy an expansion pack or "stuff pack" every three months, with crappy digital downloads in between is pretty ridiculous in itself.
The Sims franchise has always been a mess outside of the PC. It failing on a handheld comes as no real surprise.
The Sims franchise has always been a mess outside of the PC. It failing on a handheld comes as no real surprise.
1210
Movies & TV / Re: New Movies/TV Shows we should keep an eye out for!
« on: March 31, 2011, 11:25:54 AM »
I think that Wonder Woman, as she stands, probably is too cheesy. She definitely was with Linda Carter. They should really run with the Greco-Roman themes that are prevents throughout the series, if anything. Oh, and get rid of the outfit... super hero outfits simply do not look good in "the real world".
1211
General Chat / Re: Google's Quest for World Dominance
« on: March 31, 2011, 11:20:56 AM »
Indeed. If it weren't for all of these government sponsored monopolies (telecoms, cable companies, etc), we'd all have much better internet by now. Instead these old dinosaurs of corporations are doing everything they can to outright destroy the internet. They've done a pathetic job of connecting and upgrading entire regions, and now they're trying to make the entire existence of the web meaningless by shrugging off net neutrality.
They want to sell you an expensive, passive "television-like" experience. They don't want to simply sell you utility service.
They want to sell you an expensive, passive "television-like" experience. They don't want to simply sell you utility service.
1212
General Chat / Re: Your #1 meal at Fast Food Restaurants
« on: March 30, 2011, 04:17:01 PM »[...] your almost never fucked over at Wendy's.
Best save that opinion for your cardiologist.
1213
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Reality Edition
« on: March 30, 2011, 04:13:56 PM »Not to get political, but with money being cut from the Art and Music departments at school, and the influx of reality TV, our children are stuck between conformity and fame, and I can hardly blame them for choosing fame. Creativity and intelligence need to be rewarded and seen as goals rather than what being successful with either attribute can bring.
Fame is conformity.
1214
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Reality Edition
« on: March 30, 2011, 11:59:37 AM »What I've never understood is why SyFy never created shows out of the millions of sci-fi books out there. There are so many ideas out there, and if they actually stuck to what they were good at, they could have cornered the nerd crowd years ago. Instead, we're reduced to reality shows, and wrestling .
They were too busy wasting money on those unwatchable "Sci-Fi Original" films. Besides, their attempt to adapt the first three Dune novels into a pair of mine-series failed. It may have been technically accurate in many ways, but it wasn't nearly as interesting as David Lynch's vision.
1215
Movies & TV / Re: New Movies/TV Shows we should keep an eye out for!
« on: March 29, 2011, 09:04:26 PM »I'm interested to see what the X-Men universe looks like without Cyclops.
It looks a lot better. Cyclops is a complete prick in every incarnation of the franchise. His death was the only good part of X3.
Y'know, after watching Wolverine, X3 doesn't seem quite as bad...
1217
Movies & TV / Re: Rate the last movie you've seen
« on: March 29, 2011, 08:54:35 PM »TI'm still trying to figure out why the Romulans in the last 2 ST movies are bald tattooed guys in leather. That really broke the believability for me.
They've only been that way in JJ Abrams' film.
Perhaps you've confused the Reman from Nemesis with the Romulans?
1218
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Reality Edition
« on: March 29, 2011, 06:20:03 PM »I think Food shows works with Travel Channel..when you travel you got to eat. Also food network...they've always had just reality shows. If shows are instructional, or documentary, then their contest based. Iron Chef has been on since I started getting food network. Chopped All-Stars has been pretty interesting this season.
I think that food shows could be alright on the Travel Channel. However, they seem to become more and more of a focus as time goes on. One or two would be alright, but they've seemingly become an abundance.
As far as Food Network goes, they barely even have any actual cooking shows anymore. All of that has been relegated to their Cooking Channel network. Heck, even the few competition shows that used to be worth watching have been butchered over time. Iron Chef America is a fine example of that.
1219
Movies & TV / Re: Rate the last movie you've seen
« on: March 29, 2011, 06:03:21 PM »The writes had no choice regarding Dax. Terry wanted out and they couldn't convince her otherwise.
Oh, I know. I don't fault them for getting rid of Jadzia. It was clearly beyond their control. I think they should have let the character rest however, instead of immediately introducing Ezri. I thought that Ezri was actually pretty interesting, but she wasn't given enough time due to the show itself coming to an end. Besides, it seemed a little weird that the Symbiosis Commission would have allowed Ezri to go right back to DS9 to work. It seems like it would have been toeing the line on living a new, unique life.
Most of [JJ Abram's Star Trek] had more similarities to Mission Impossible 3 than Star Trek.
That's kind of ironic, given that Brannon Braga was one of the primary writers for Mission Impossible 2.
For me, Abram's Star Trek was just too generic. It was all action and flashy effects with practically no substance. It also had one of the weakest villains I've ever seen in any film, Star Trek or otherwise. The only real plus I can think of is that it had Leonard Nimoy in it, and that the Klingons looked pretty damn awesome in the deleted scenes.
1220
General Chat / Re: The State of T.V: Reality Edition
« on: March 29, 2011, 05:48:23 PM »
Reality television is less redeeming than the general programming found nowadays. It's all basically the same and has little payoff. It's cheap and easy to make however, so studio execs love it.
I've never heard of Quantum Kitchen before. After a little searching though, it doesn't sound all that different than any number of shows that Food Network or even Discovery Channel has. That, I think, has been the biggest problem with television over the last several years in particular. Every channel is slowing becoming an exact copy of the previous one. In an attempt at mass appeal, each channel is giving up the niche that once made them unique. They have forsaken their old dedicated audience in favor of a more fickle mainstream one.
The History Channel shows little more than Biblical Apocalypse and alien abduction programming nowadays. The Travel Channel seems intent on having food shows. The Food Network is almost all reality programs now. Sci-Fi (oops, I mean "SyFy") has professional wrestling, cops, and now reality restauranteur shows. G4 absorbed and destroyed everything that made ZDTV/TechTV great, replacing it instead with another Spike TV clone.
Face it, television is dead.
I've never heard of Quantum Kitchen before. After a little searching though, it doesn't sound all that different than any number of shows that Food Network or even Discovery Channel has. That, I think, has been the biggest problem with television over the last several years in particular. Every channel is slowing becoming an exact copy of the previous one. In an attempt at mass appeal, each channel is giving up the niche that once made them unique. They have forsaken their old dedicated audience in favor of a more fickle mainstream one.
The History Channel shows little more than Biblical Apocalypse and alien abduction programming nowadays. The Travel Channel seems intent on having food shows. The Food Network is almost all reality programs now. Sci-Fi (oops, I mean "SyFy") has professional wrestling, cops, and now reality restauranteur shows. G4 absorbed and destroyed everything that made ZDTV/TechTV great, replacing it instead with another Spike TV clone.
Face it, television is dead.
1221
General Gaming / Re: SquEnix Opens New Studio For Smartphone Gaming.
« on: March 29, 2011, 11:27:18 AM »The majority of people cannot (or at least think they cannot, which amounts to the same thing) build their own computer, and buying a completed gaming rig tends to be quite expensive. The idea that PC gaming is a expensive might be a myth, but so is Nintendo being kiddie, and yet both ideas adversely affect the sales of their subjects.
No one but dumb kids buy "gaming rigs" though. They're even more stupidly overpriced than your general prefab PC. Most people would be just as happy with a typical HP. They'd just have to throw a video card in afterward. With the kind of money people spend of low-end laptops for everyday use, they could instead get a much more capable desktop. But laptops have become the fad, I suppose. Despite being underpowered and impossible to upgrade, people like the convenience and portability despite never leaving the kitchen table anyway.
Besides, I don't know that Nintendo is so-much perceived as kiddie nowadays. They really grabbed the casual market by the horns with the Wii. While their is certainly some overlap, I generally perceive the Wii being played more by grandmas and soccer moms than children.
1222
TalkBack / Re: Club Nintendo Reduces Coin Earning Window
« on: March 29, 2011, 11:18:08 AM »
Maybe people would be more keen on taking the surveys if the end goals were better. The Club Nintendo prizes are laughable, at best. It's not even worth striving for Platinum level when the best they can offer is a calendar or something.
1223
General Gaming / Re: SquEnix Opens New Studio For Smartphone Gaming.
« on: March 28, 2011, 07:14:54 PM »What's the point of PC gaming where you have to buy a high-priced new rig every year to play the latest games, when console gaming offers you a more affordable alternative?
That's odd. My PC is almost four years old now. It plays even the newest games on the highest settings. I guarantee you that it cost me less to build my PC than it would have to buy a PS3 at the time. Not only is it more powerful and versatile than any console that was and/or is out on the market, it can quickly and cheaply be upgraded with one or two components to get it right back on par in another year or two. The idea that gaming is unaffordable on the PC is a myth. It always has been, and is becoming evermore so with each passing day. Moore's Law has been slowing down considerably the last few years. Give up the FUD.
Now obviously, the variety of hardware inherent in the PC market does create some problems. Small problems. A little additional bug testing, clearly stated hardware requirements? Really though, unless you're running some esoteric configuration, you generally aren't going to see any issues. Everyone has at least one PC in their house nowadays. Why waste the money and room on a dedicated gaming console if it's not offering anything distinct?
Also, about an early point Ian made; digital download games wouldn't cost $30 at least not yet, as part of the price of $30/$40 game is the cartridge.
Do you really believe that publishers are going to allow themselves to miss out on profits like that? They'll keep game prices right where they are, regardless of the costs.
1224
Movies & TV / Re: Rate the last movie you've seen
« on: March 28, 2011, 12:22:02 PM »I feel Nemesis gets judged overly harsh as it followed Insurrection which lost a lot of good will and quite frankly by that time Star Trek had gotten tired. While Enterprise was the nail in the coffin, you can blame the state of Star Trek on the people who conceived and crashed Voyager, so you can blame Star Treks demise on Janeway. Even Kate Mulgrew felt her character had gone insane and played her as such.
Nemesis was more of a Star Trek film that that latest crap from JJ Abrams, at least.
I liked Voyager all the way through. It had its problems, but was pretty consistent. Sure, the characters started out cheesy, but so did TNG. Really, the only issues I have with Voyager when looking back on it are twofold: Janeway knew everything. She was a jack-of-all-trades, instead of relying on her crew as other captains would have. Also, they kind of watered down the Borg by the end of the series. There were some pretty awesome Borg episodes, but they were practically declawed after so many loosing encounters with Voyager.
For me, I felt Star Trek started to slip towards the end of Deep Space Nine. I always felt that the characters and situations were a little dull on that series, but the last two or three seasons were ridiculously boring. Far-reaching war story arch? Switching out Dax at the last second? Going hogwild with Sisko's whacky cult status? Turning Dukat into Satan-incarnate? ...Yeah.
Likewise, I thought Enterprise was good until they again introduced a serialized war story. It immediately became boring at that point. I could complain about the inconsistencies in continuity, but the "temporal cold war" explains that away easily enough, I suppose.
1225
NWR Forums Discord / Re: Man, do the advertisers on NWR know us or what?
« on: March 28, 2011, 12:13:04 PM »
Wait, you see ads? I didn't realize that there were still people in the world without AdBlock plugins.
The entire contents of this Web site, unless otherwise noted, are Copyright © 1999 - 2012 NINWR, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ™ and © for all products, characters, and indicia related thereto which are contained herein are owned by the companies who market or license those products. This Web site is not endorsed, sponsored, nor otherwise affiliated with Nintendo. It has been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and knowledge. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form without consent from NINWR, LLC is prohibited.
