Messages

Will it run on my Pentium II 200 MHz?  If not, you're a graphics whore.

Oh, and don't call me by my real name, I'm trying to stay anonymous on these forums.

You could say exactly the same thing about any entertainment - books, films, music, art, tv, comics, what have you. Read that before, heard that before, seen that before. If it's well done, it'll entertain.

You're right on there.  I completely agree.  I meant to focus on me (being the narcisist that I am) and not everybody else with my comments but you're right, if something is good, it entertains and will continue to entertain someone, which means that it achieves its goal.  I was just trying to express that for *me*, I'm getting, or at least feeling, old.  And I'm tired of the same old (though not necessarily bad) stuff that keeps coming out with updated graphics.  If I'm going to start playing games regularly like I used to, I need to be hooked by something different.

Now, don't you all feel belittled?

Ummm, no?

Sorry, that whole thing was supposed to be making fun of people who say things like that because they think that they're better than others.  I thought that came through in my third paragraph... I really was just meaning it to express that *I* am tired of this stuff and not that people who are impressed by new-graphics-same-gameplay should in any way feel "belittled."

I just knew that what I was going to say was going to sound pretentious, and I wanted you to know that I was aware of that fact, and I wanted to play it down by making fun of myself at the same time.

Damned sarcasm losing its effect when transmitted digitally...

As usual, sorry for sounding more harsh than I meant.  I really need to practice using those smileys.

I should have just called you all graphics whores and left it at that.

Kinoko:  BAM!

I owed you one!

I don't want to play a game like that.

Then you're in luck!  Because there is no game like that.  That trailer, and all of these others, were rendered over several hours on a high-end computer (possibly several of them) and NOT on the PS3/XBOX360 hardware.  The game that comes out will not look like that.  It'll still look good, better than the games of this generation, but not THAT good.

I really don't care. 

If I may be a complete pretentious ass for a few minutes, I will launch into the same rant that countless other pretentious ass gamers are spewing out around the internet to try and look cool.  I will, of course, deliver this same rant while pretending that I'm completely original, counter-culture, and better than all of you.  Ready? Good.

As I've stated before on this forum, games hardly interest me anymore.  I feel that I've done everything.  I've killed zombies, flown through space, been in wars (several of them, many fictional), saved civilizations, etc.  The gameplay is not interesting anymore.  It's all the same stuff with new graphical bells and whistles.

Everyonce and a while something comes along that's exciting (most recently Katamari Damacy) and I'll suddenly be into games (well... at least one of them) again.  That's why I'm totally looking forward to the Revolution.  I want to play interesting new types of games and I want to play them with my wife.  Graphics are not really an issue.  Fun.  That's the issue.

Now, don't you all feel belittled?

I've got something worked up for this contest, but I wanted to quickly ask: Are we allowed to post these on the CL to help polish them up before entering, or should I do that after the contest?

EDIT 36 HOURS LATER: Silence is consent!

Thanks for the comments, Risk and lakerz!  If you've got a sec, be sure to leave a comment or a vote on the game's page!

Now you could go even further and say, those power-ups are (again especially in singleplayer mode) negative power-ups. The player should try to stay away from them.

You're right.  And that's actually a cool thing.  Try to hit the ball while avoiding the bad powerups.  However, this feature just doesn't jive with the multiplayer. 

Also, it would be nice if the difference between the camera speed up and slow down boxes was more obvious, so you could make the decision between getting and avoiding while concentrating on the ball and the confusing controls.

It's an interesting game, and I can see how it would be quite fun after getting the hang of the controls and playing it with a buddy.  Sorry if I sounded more negative than I meant to.  I do that a lot.

Well, the game is well scripted and visually neat, so I'll examine it from a game design standpoint rather than a technical one.

In most games, fighting with annoying camera angles and movements is considered a bad thing, but here it's a game mechanic.  It's quite frustrating for you to have to keep thinking about which way the camera is facing before you can figure out which way your paddle is going to move when you press a button.  "Does left mean left now, or does it mean right?"  Also, when the camera is situated just right (placing a paddle on either side of the screen) you have no depth perception which often makes hitting the ball or getting a power up a stroke of luck rather than skill. 

Speaking of power-ups, one is hardly inclined to get one when it punishes/rewards both players equally.  I suppose if one player who is more skilled with a fast camera he might want to speed it up while the other player tries to slow it down... this creates an even bigger gap between an unskilled and skilled player, making the game unballanced. Two players of equal skill have no reason to pick up the power-ups since they'll both be equally effected by them, so why go out of their way?  Perhaps, working with your "confuse the player by making him dizzy" gameplay design, one power up could suddenly flip the other player's controls...

You've actually created a 2D pong game.  The only thing that the third dimension adds is the camera rotation which, granted, is the entire innovation here.  I'm just not sure it's a successful one.  It does add a challenge, but I'm not sure it's a fun challenge rather than a frustrating one.

However, the game is technically pleasing.  If the arena and paddle models displayed correctly it would be even more so.  I particularly like the reflection on the field.  Well done.

But BSG takes its self very seriously.  It's serious sci-fi.  Firefly is just meant to be a fun romp.  You can't really say that it pulls its punches just because it doesn't have robots getting raped.

On a side note, Gaius Baltar is a more interesting character than any on Firefly.  I love that guy.  I just wish he would get more screen time.

Doesn't everything compares unfavorably with Battlestar?  The first season of BSG was one of the best seasons of anything ever.  However, the second season felt a lot more loose, disjointed, and slow.  I would say that Firefly (which is really a completely different kind of SciFi... like apples and space oranges) as a whole was more entertaining than the second season of Battlestar.  In my opinion anyway.

blah-blah and so-and-so have given their son (3 years old, I believe?) tatoos. What about that?

What an amazing idea...

Seriously!  That's awesome!  It's like those little tablets that you put in hot water, right? and they grow into big dinosaur sponges.  Except, instead of a tablet, it's a living baby! And instead of a dinosaur sponge... it's an adult with a really stretched out tatoo of a soccer (foot) ball and a high psychiatrist bill because of his parent-issues!

At least no one will pick on him at school.

I really wish people would stop branding this show with "From the creator of Buffy and Angel" because that turns off a huge audience (myself included).  Buffy had a huge following, but from the two or so episodes I had seen, I couldn't stand it.  I almost let my distaste for the creator's previous work prevent me from ever seeing this show.  But I'm glad I eventually came around and tried out Firefly, because it's fantastic.

So, from someone who didn't like Buffy or Angel, rest assured, this show is a different beast.

And I think the marketing (both commercial and grassroots) organizations would quit relying on "from the creator of Buffy" because it really is driving away just about everyone who isn't already part of said grassroots marketing organization.

I can settle this argument with only two words:
Con-Air.

That settles it.  Nicholas Cage is worse than Hitler!

I'm glad we got that out of the way.

Upon searching, they all seem to play themselves in a lot of movies, but not much else... which is the same argument that keeps being leveraged against Nic Cage.  I personally can't see what makes Bin Laden, Hitler, Castro, Pol Pot and Karadjic any worse than Mr. Cage.

In my list if hate Bin Laden, Hitler, Castro, Pol Pot and Karadjic

I've never seen any of their movies.  I'll have to check them out on IMDB...

It's based on one of the best sci-fi shows ever that got cancelled after only 13 episodes because Fox put it in a time slot that gets watched less than my webpage.  The show is witty and charming as hell.  Not to mention fun, exciting, and imaginative.  The characters just plain rock.

The fans of this show are going to see the movie no matter what, so the trailers are geared at getting your average action-flick-Joe into the seats.

And yes, there's lots of talk about more films in the series IF the movie performs well.  So... GO!

I don't think I could ever, being a male, judge another man of being sexy. How do you difine sexy in the male human being.  Let me know Vince, so I can judge for myself.

Nothing complicated -- just a little tingling in the genitals...

[he]

I bet Kinoko posted this because he'd just heard the bad news, too.... :'(

Real quick, Kinoko = she

He's 1000 times better than Tom Cruise.

But 1/1000 as sexy.

I've mentioned before that the LJUBI twins are my favorite posters, right?  It's just so comforting to know that I can't be the dumbest person in the world.

And if I may answer a question from a while ago:

Who are you to take the moral high ground?

Dude, they are the song written by the hands of God!!!  I'd say that more than qualifies them to tell you what is and isn't morally right.