|
Post by Bob on Jun 13, 2013 13:45:49 GMT -8
It's all true. So very, very true. And there's more to add to that, which is what's most sad of all. There really is a huge divide between gamers and game developers. It's why I keep on this idea that game developers need to look back to NES or even Atari to see why and how people REALLY play games.
For instance, when we hooked up the NES, we put a big, fluffy recliner in front of it and my wife said "but there's only one." I told her she could have it because I grew up playing on the floor! That's right, NES (or SNES in my case) + TV on some shitty stand (or on the floor for a few of my earlier years) + carpet = sit my ass down and play me some vidja games! That's where it's at! There is NO way I could ever own a Move or Kinect (and why Wii isn't terribly appealing) just because my house isn't friggin big enough. My big TV has a giant couch about two feet from it--I have a sofa with a chaise in it, so it extends way out. Real seat is more like six feet away, but either way, ain't no 10 feet square area of emptiness!
Anyway, point is, this article gets it right, but really only skims the surface of how dumb these game developers have become.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Jun 13, 2013 15:57:17 GMT -8
Unrelated to video games, but news nonetheless. First look at Legend of Korra: Book 2 www.ign.com/videos/2013/06/10/the-legend-of-korra-first-book-2-footageFirst impressions... hmm... I dunno. The spirits look kinda dumb. Like they're unfinished, when compared the rest of the animation. And I don't know, maybe they ARE unfinished, but even still, their designs are kinda meh too. "Large mono-color thing with glowing eyes and sharp teeth." Not exactly breaking new ground with that design there. I figured, having mastered Air, the second season would move on to Korra's ability (or lack of ability) to work with the spirit realm. I still wish the Equalists would be a part of this, because it seems like a missed opportunity to have their whole arc wrapped up just because Amon got defeated/disgraced. Wouldn't it be cool to have Equalists AND the spirit realm going crazy at once, thus forcing Korra to have to divide her time between them? I guess I'll have to wait and see what the final results are. EDIT: Also, the two people that Nick sent to check out the Korra studios are tools. Massive tools.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Jun 14, 2013 22:12:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Oct 1, 2013 1:45:02 GMT -8
So America doesn't have a government right now. I guess this means I can finally marry my dog? I dunno. The rules aren't clear here.
By the way, we're getting a bus together to move to Canada. Anyone who's interested in joining should bring cookies and clean clothes and a sleeping bag.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Oct 1, 2013 5:54:56 GMT -8
Woof.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Oct 1, 2013 22:22:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Oct 4, 2013 12:29:37 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Oct 4, 2013 20:59:17 GMT -8
Yyyyup.
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Oct 7, 2013 8:42:39 GMT -8
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24427821Are these robotics programs becoming uncomfortably reminiscent of MGS to anyone other than me? Also, and almost as importantly, "manoeuvrability"? Count? Any explanations? Most British spellings I don't mind/prefer, but what IS ^that monstrosity?
|
|
|
Post by countlieberkuhn on Oct 7, 2013 18:15:43 GMT -8
That's a weird spelling indeed, although the part that gets me is that lack of an 'e' before the 'r'. But that's because manoeuvre is the base spelling, and I guess changing it around for the extended word would be even more problematic.
I think the 'o' could be omitted though, that spelling suggests it should be pronounced man-over more than ma-new-ver.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Oct 7, 2013 18:59:53 GMT -8
I decided to do some research on the subject, and it appears that we have Medieval Latin to blame for this monstrosity of a spelling. www.wordreference.com/definition/manoeuvrabilityIt appears that the word started from the Medieval Latin "manuopera" meaning "manual work" and then changed into "manū operāre," meaning to work with the hand. Although we changed the meaning a little bit and the spelling considerably, this is probably another example of excessively pedantic scribes who wanted to keep the spelling of the word as close to the original Latin as possible, even though the "operāre" part of the word is not really relevant anymore. The same reasoning can be applied to why there's a silent "B" in "doubt," as shown in this video.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Feb 2, 2014 2:44:24 GMT -8
FINALLY! VINDICATION! www.hypable.com/2014/02/01/jk-rowling-ron-hermione-relationship-regret-interview/At long last, J. K. Rowling admits that Ron/Hermione are a stupid, idiotic, nonsensical pairing and all their shippers are idiots without the slightest sense of relationship dynamics (that's an exact quote from the article). Among all the other things that irk me about the Harry Potter universe, I have never understood Ron/Hermione. She's a booksmart geek and he's an idiot. So... match made in heaven? Granted, Harry/Hermione is kind of a dull pairing too, and like it says in the article, it's been done before in basically every other fantasy book. It's nice that HP doesn't pair up the leading man with the leading lady, but for Hermione to go slumming for Ron has never made sense to me. Proponents of Ron/Hermione always say, "LOL! But they bicker like a couple!" Anyone who thinks that bickering = love is doomed to be 60 years old and working on his/her fourth divorce. And the whole, "But LOL Harry and Hermione are like LOL brother and sister! Eww incest unLOL!" are stupid too. As Rowling admits, she kind of forced Ron/Hermione together, so the sibling-esque nature of Harry/Hermione's relationship was probably doctored as well. Basically I'm saying that their whole relationship dynamic could be swapped with an easy editing run. But I'm not really talking about how they act with each other, but rather the fundamental elements of their nature. Ron and Hermione, if I'm remembering right, have basically nothing in common. Hermione is like, 50% Ravenclaw and Ron is 50% troll. I can see why Ron would be interested in dating up, but why would Hermione want to date down? She just have a fetish for gingers? I dunno. Long story short, I've always held that Ron/Hermione was a stupid pairing and I'm glad I've finally got some official support. EDIT: Also, what the hell's up with Harry and Ginny? For one, what the hell's so great about Ginny? For two, why the hell is Ron so okay with his best friend banging his sister?
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Feb 2, 2014 2:52:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Feb 2, 2014 9:41:48 GMT -8
I'm gonna just assume he said something stupid. When I clicked that link, the page loaded all of the twitter comments to the right under a slew of ads, so I can't read anything. I reloaded, same thing. So I'm going to assume he said "I HATE KITTENS!"
And y'know, on the topic, I will agree that Ron/Hermione never made sense to me. It felt very forced. I remember when they first start dating in the book and I just felt like I missed something. Even reread a few pages to check. BUT, at the same time, there is something to be said for opposites attract and such. These are pretty extreme opposites, but relationships are sometimes based on being opposites and challenging each other to be better. Ron is an idiot, but moreso, he's got heart (he's 1/5 of Captain Planet). So he brings that to the party and makes Hermione be nicer and less "I'm a super genius wizard and you should all be bowing to me right about now." Because, seriously, they kind of should. Then there's Hermione, who basically challenges Ron to not be a 'tard.
So basically, I don't MIND the relationship, but it is awkward. There are better people for both of them, I'd imagine. Hermione could probably snag any Ravenclaw dude and Ron had a long-term relationship with his hand that he might turn back to when they get divorced. "Oh Righty. You never did me wrong. I never should've left you!"
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Feb 2, 2014 14:00:56 GMT -8
Yeah, the site shows up that way for me too. What I did was I highlighted all the text and then copy/pasted it into another document. It's not really worth going through all that effort, unless you want to see a lot of famous people acting butthurt about a fictional pairing. It's kind of amusing anyway.
And since we're on the subject, John Green said, "Books belong to their readers."
That, in itself, isn't what made me mad. Basically, I'm angry because he keeps reusing that phrase in various contexts to explain various things, and it gets dumber every time. This is now like, the 500th time I've seen him say that, and my instant reaction was, "What the fuck! AGAIN?" He's on his way to turning "Books belong to their readers," into his own personal version of "YOLO."
Also, I could write an entire separate document about why I don't think that books belong to their readers (or at least they don't in the sense that he means) but I think I'd be the only one interested in reading that.
|
|