Messages

3526

Gaming / Re: Final Fantasy XIV

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:50:09 PM »

An acquaintance of mine is in, anything specific you want me to ask?

In hindsight that video is entirely unimpressive other than the setup (translator and all), I've seen more interesting character creation screens.

How's the gameplay? XII-like?

3527

Off The Wall / Re: Post Pictures Of Yourself

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:48:29 PM »

Just I getting ready to sail to Galiano island. 

Nice boat.

3528

Entertainment / Re: DC Animated Universe Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:47:25 PM »

I see, thanks.


Also, to have some sort of discussion...

What version of Batman is your favorite? DCAU version, B&TB version, comic version or any other?
Mine will always be DCAU version. It was after all, the first one I've ever known(tough I'm not sure, if I didn't see the Burton's movie first).
What I like about him, is the fact that he's just different than all his other incarantions, and in my opinion, he is a perfect example of how Batman should be.
He should be a colossal dick, "no fun allowed" kinda guy, overly serious and [tornado fang]ing brutal when needed be.

Also, there's that thing about his sad life, and its future, that makes me pity him.

Well? Which one is your favorite?

My favorite? Well, that's a toughie.

Batman is one of the most distinguished entities in comic books of all time. Maybe THE most distinguished. He's been through good and bad stories, stood through the test of time, and will always be remembered as the hero without superpowers when everyone else has them. But as far as Batman goes, there have been quite alot of personalities he has incarnated. It's fitting that this question is made right after #700, which was basically a big tribute to all of the hero's personalities, has come out.



Batman started out as a detective who dressed like a bat, wasn't ashamed of using a gun, and killed enemies as he pleased, for the sake of whatever. He was a pulp character, designed for pure entertainment. Back when all kinds of people read comics at their absolute leisure. I find it funny when (like this image) there are tributes to this old character, the one whose cowl actually looked like a bat's, instead of a ninja mask with two spikes on top.


Of course, kids love edgy stuff. But Batman wasn't a very kiddy character. So they decided to make him more kid-friendly. Made him a bit more charming, added a very colorful sidekick, who he called "pal" and "chum", and they both basically behaved like two kids in a treehouse club. Most of all, they were shown in a way they they had FUN.


The guy who turned Batman into the dark, brooding detective we know nowadays, was none other than Frank Miller. First, with the thought-provoking out of continuity story that gave origin to the new Batman, "The Dark Knight Returns". It's considered by many to be the best Batman story of all time, and it was so successful, that Frank Miller ended up writing the new, after-Crisis continuity origin for Batman, in Batman: Year One. It was a new era for the caped crusader.


The animated series did a terriific job with the balance between the comic's realistic violence and the children's programming television has to abide by. Paul Dini helped shape the character into a terrific one, helping the DCAU gain heavy popularity and to be considered by the TV-watchers-non-comic-readers to be the "true canon". It crossed over several times into the actual comic universe, but still retained its individuality. I see it as yet another great incarnation of the character.

...one thing I did love about the Batman in the Animated Series, and hated about the one in the Justice League/JLU, is that while he was a dark knight of justice who frowned at villains, he smiled at children. In JL, as great as the show was, they pretty much made him into the "[dark hold]" of the group. The Raphael. The outside rebel. I still maintain that out of sight, he and Superman had a few beers and traded jokes all the time.


One thing I love about good Batman writers, be they Miller, Morrison, Loeb or Dini (attention, this is pre-crazy Miller and Loeb) is that they respect every single incarnation of the character, never deeming one or the other "too kiddy" or "too dark". They love BATMAN as a whole. And that's how he should be considered. As a single character with the most varied of incarnations, more varied than James Bond or Doctor Who, Batman represents the hero. He represents, not the underdog, but the guy who makes his own path in life. The self-made man. The man who battles small things like street crime in one day, and battles dark gods for the fate of the multiverse in the next. Because that's what Batman is. He's not simply an individual. He's an entity. A legacy.

Superman is the everyman.


Green Lantern is the soldier.


Wonder Woman is the warrior.


Flash is the family man.


Who is Batman?

He's Batman. Today...



Batman is there. Always.







He's Batman.

As for your question?

...I like the Batman who can both frown and smile.

3529

Gaming / Re: ITS MAHVEL 3 BAYBEE (The MvC3 topic)

« on: June 10, 2010, 02:27:43 PM »

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE:

Nearly a year from now then. Hope that translates into pure quality.

3530

Gaming / Re: Final Fantasy XIV

« on: June 10, 2010, 02:13:33 PM »

Anyone got the beta yet? I'm curious to how it'll work in the greater context.

Since this is the only Final Fantasy with decent character designs and that is visually pleasing with casual medieval stuff instead of colorful unwealdy clusterfucks, I'm interested in it. Specially with these rumors that it's gonna be expansion-based instead of subscription-based.

3531

Gaming / Re: Sonic Adventure to PC, PS3 X360

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:30:32 PM »

Yeah, DC SA Runs slower, the Chao Garden was primitive, and you couldn't skip cutscenes (Ergh.). I've played both (DC ver on PC able to run it Full Speed, GC on... GC.) and to be honest, other than a few small things I liked in DX, I actually like DC more, the crappier Player Models fit better with the rest of the game, because they never bothered to update Eggman, Chaos, or any People NPC's. And the shininess is ugly, to be terribly honest.

But according to the ESRB, BOTH versions are coming out, both original and DX.... odd.

They'll probably come out with something like "Sonic Adventure Special" and you'll be able to choose between both.

But DX had the Game Gear games...

So do emulators. I don't see GG games being any relevant to the game itself.

3532

Entertainment / Re: DC Animated Universe Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:29:52 PM »

Hey, this is kinda DCAU related, since it's about a DC cartoon.
Did the special event of Brave & the Bold, the one with Starro conquering earth, aired yet?
Just curious.

Not yet, as far as I know.

3533

Gaming / Re: The Kingdom Hearts Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:28:04 PM »

I guess I'll "buy" it too.

I'm interested to know how the gameplay will work.

3534

Gaming / Re: The Kingdom Hearts Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:48:53 AM »

Since Coded aparently kills off two important characters and is pretty much the prologue for KH3, I'd say it's important in the overall storyline. Which explains why it's being released over here instead of just being skipped.

3535

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:46:07 AM »

I'd go with a PS3, myself.

3536

Entertainment / Re: DC Animated Universe Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:25:32 AM »

Well I'm not saying the concept was bad by any stretch. Heck, it's synthesized the elements of the Silver Age that I liked with the Modern Age but that's what DC's doing with Superman now, so better late than never in that respect. Imagine a few of these Morrison-esque elements made it to All-Star Superman.

Then Waid had Birthright, and Millar Red Son. What's actually kind of funny that this proposal was written shortly before Millar hit it big with the Authority, which ultimately lead to his break with DC.

We shouldn't be sad, then. Those three Supes stories, along with "Up, Up and Away!!" are my favorite Superman stories of all time. They really hit it big.


...also, sorry for spoilers, but DCAU-relevant. Batman #700 makes Beyond comic canon. Terry is officially the fourth Batman, only this time trained by Damian instead of Bruce. Tim still looks like he's the future Joker.

3537

Gaming / Re: Sonic the Hedgehog 4 (Wii, PS3, 360, iPhone)

« on: June 10, 2010, 04:22:24 AM »

Flash, I define repeated use of all caps and sarcasm as bitching.  Which you may do at any point you wish, it just takes considerably more boredom for me to be willing to read it.  I'm only stating my point of view; if I thought you were doing anything wrong I'd have reported it.  I don't.

I'm not really sure why you're insisting on comparing a flight game to a platformer, which is an apples-and-oranges thing to me, but so be it.  Mock my play time all you want, but I never found Shadow so frustrating as to drop it prior to the Last Story.  No, I did not expect the game to progress as multiple boat levels, however, I DID expect the game to flow into repeated forced and broken gimmick stages irrelevant to the game's core mechanics.  You haven't offered any counter-point to suggest that the late-game is any better focus.  In fact all I've heard of the children gameplay suggests the opposite to be true.  Further, when among your major complaints is the control mechanics, it does not take the full length of the game to confirm that they suck.  I went with the pointer over the analogue stick because I was not confident in how natural an analogue stick will feel from a profile view.  But hey, when I run out of good games to play, maybe I'll try again.  As much as I despise the game, I'm not in the habit of trade-ins, so it's still there on my shelf.  And when/if I do, I will take you control advise to heart.  But don't expect much.  The hurdles I have encountered thus far still outweigh those I encountered in either Shadow or Heroes.  The fact that this is before I encounter the children gameplay, which I cannot possible imagine as even belonging in the game, much less pleasant, is not encouraging.

I'd appreciate it if you would refrain from addaulting my point of view as a means to justifying your own.  "About 10%" is an exaggeration, unless you're suggesting the game has 20 bosses.  Dismiss me as uninformed if you must, but do note that I've caught you in two false criticisms already (avoiding enemies in Shadow and lack of play difference between BK's Knights of the Round Table), and you've demonstrated that you don't recall the game you're defending well enough to know a mandatory minigame when one discusses it.  At least when I give you a fact that backs my opinion, I'm confident it's actually true.

I don't care about screenshot comparisons.  I already told you that Shadow's visuals do not impress me.  But NiGHTS was released considerably later, and after Secret Rings, I expect better from Sega.

FYI, your complaints of my comments being too vague make this my final response in which I attempt to avoid my traditional use of quote tags.  That's why I use them, so you know specifically what I'm responding to.  I avoided it here simply because I was in a bit of a hurry.
Rush.
Well, that's WHY it bothers me.  Otherwise I probably wouldn't care.

I haven't known the Sonic Team game that has done Mission Mode well, either.  Shadow was close, IMO, closer than many realize given how many seem to believe that there are enemies you shouldn't be killing (???).  But it still wasn't right.
I must wholeheartedly disagree.  I find Shadow's death in SA2 as senseless as Zero's in X5.  He's invulnerable, empowered by the 7 emeralds and thus able to teleport at will, and he dies by falling into the atmosphere?  Riiiiiight.  

See, I don't buy one dying simply because their "destiny" is fulfilled.  Something has to actually kill them.  And if the cause of death is half-assed, then I don't expect any better should a revival be attempted.

Not everyone likes caps, so I'll stop using them to highlight stuff in this debate. But sarcasm? That's the nacional language of the net.

Comparison issue: Flight games, platformers, they are all measured by the same thing deep down. Quality control. Graphics quality, gameplay fluidity, bugs... (specially bugs). They all can be used as standards. And as far as I've seen, Shadow ranks below Nights and Heroes in that.

Frustration/controls issue: There are five short "mandatory gimmick stages" in the whole game. Three levels where you play with the children, the boat one, and a rollercoaster one which pretty much handles like the "flying straight" parts in the main game. The children's parts don't have any control problem with them aside from being boring, as you've seen from the hub gameplay. From what I can see, you were playing flight levels when you quit the game, which means you had a problem with them. That's a problem you had with the style and gameplay of the game itself. The genre, if you may. Nights is about flying around in a 2D/3D plane with constant tricks and loops. Watch a video of the classic games to see how it is. Such things have to be done with an analog stick. Complaining about the flying stages' base controls is like complaining about Megaman not shooting up. It's the genre. It's good for what it is, aside from any actual control issues you might have concerning bugs or badly-mapped movements.

Points of view: Alright then, 10% isn't really accurate, it was just a slight estimation. I don't remember the game that well, having only played it once on launch, but from what I see, you must've played about a seventh of the game, at least. Regarding walkthroughs. Not to mention the a-life thing, collections, and ranks to get the best endings and bosses. As to avoiding enemies in Shadow, I'll get there later. Lack of play difference when fighting the knights? Please, I just waggled my way through both knights and levels. I think I had to back up a bit on Blaze, THEN waggle, but aside from that, jeez, it's pretty much the same dissapointing battle over and over. Not even any decent bosses, like Secret Rings had.

In terms of screenshots, you can at least see work went on Nights' designs, the graphical models and the overall ambiance. Shadow felt like several blocks placed randomly.

If the quote tags make it better for you to respond, then be my guest.

I kinda forgot that one fact about Rush. But I think it was only in certain enemies, the ones in the endurance rooms, correct? Defeat X enemies to go through? That kinda made sense in a design perspective, but I get the point, and I agree that no Sonic game should have energy bars on enemies. One spin, one kill.

Yes, playing through the same game time and time again makes no sense, but honestly, better to play through the same mediocre game, than to experience a worse one. On the mission mode, I must wholeheartedly disagree. Shadow's missions are not just the only way to play through the game, but pretty much mandatory. While on Heroes, in one fourth of the whole game you got search missions with obviously findeable objects in levels you've been in before, with tiny changes in design. Shadow? You got [parasitic bomb] like the search for bombs in the city, with the very worst of level designs, enemies you can barely find, and complete crap you end up disregarding for the sake of finishing the level in an easier and less frustrating way.

About the enemies? Yes, I do find the enemy kill selection something awful. Even though you can kill "allies" and still proceed with the mission. Why? Because it makes no sense, takes away from your immersion in the game (if there ever was any) and makes it so awful to play. You're allying yourself with a faction. Why should that faction attack you in the first place? You've got followers. Why don't they stop you once you've seen you do good or evil things, against their alignment? Shouldn't Sonic... I dunno, stop you from shooting people with a desert eagle? And why shouldn't you be able to make the selection between enemies you want to and don't want to kill in the first place? Just because they don't really matter if they're killed in few numbers, it doesn't mean you should just do it "because it works". It's like staying in a corner of the screen where the boss can't hit you for an entire battle. Or killing your allies in Fallout 3 to loot their bodies as a response to "they got bad AI, but you can continue the game without them!" That's not the point. The point is to make a good, coherent game. If you're siding with them, you shouldn't kill them because the game's engine is too damn bad to notice who you want to kill! Have you noticed how you have to stop and aim reeeeeeeeeeally carefully on where Shadow is actually looking at, everytime you want to aim a heavy weapon like a rocket launcher? Heck, any weapon really. What kind of game does this? It's awful.

And about Shadow's death? Here's my game.
Shadow's a guy who's been trapped in a space colony all his life, as a child's plaything. He loves this kid, but he knows for a fact that humans gunned her down in front of him. He awakens 50 years later on Earth. Of course he's gonna want to [tornado fang] some [parasitic bomb] up. So he does whatever he can to fulfill his goal, being a cocky [tornado fang]er while he does it, and cooperating with Gerald's grandson, the only guy he knows can operate the machine. Everything goes smoothly, plans get a little warped, and he gets what he wants anyway. The space colony goes on a crash course with Earth, and is about to destroy it. Then... aw, [parasitic bomb]. He actually remembers the rest of the promise. SAVE the Earth. So, he does what he has to. Not being a good guy, just fulfilling his objective. Once he's done it, seriously, what else does he have to live for? Why should he want to keep on living, even? Maria's dead. Does he want to stay in the colony all his life, all alone, reminiscing for eternity? Does he want to go down there live with the humans who killed Maria? Seriously, why should he want to live in the first place? Maria's dead, he's going to meet her. Sayonara.

3538

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 10, 2010, 02:16:02 AM »

Can anyone trell me what does 'fighting without fighting' mean?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw8HvKnEsto[/youtube]

3539

Entertainment / Re: DC Animated Universe Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:48:42 AM »

I thought this would be worth mentioning. DC nearly did OMD Superman-- about eight years before "One More Day" hit the stands in fact and you wouldn't guess who was responsible for pitching it. Mark Waid, Mark Millar, Tom Peyer, and GRANT [tornado fang]ing MORRISON!

Don't believe me? Take a look at the pitch they sent in 1999. Granted, what they proposed was far more respectful to the characters than what Joey Q did... "It's magic, we don't have to explain it!" my left foot.

I know. I saw it. And honestly? TRULY honestly? I never criticize a story by concept. If people had told m the concepts of every single one of Morrison's stories, I would have thought he was just some crazy guy. Batman having a son, then dying by the light time-phasing beams of a dark god? Bullshit. But he made it work. He made it work seriously well.

During the 90's, Superman went through alot of crappy stories. He was a character in need of an overhaul. And if they had scrapped Supes and started anew, I wouldn't have minded much, as long as they still made him a good hero. Morrison's writing has never dissapointed me, and while he's still sane, I'm sure it won't for a long time. Millar is another case, however. Waid has been both good and bad, mostly really good. If Superman had gone through a reboot, they would have just rebooted him like they did with Hal Jordan and his "new-ish" origin. One More Day was basically JUST about the retcon. It was a book meant to do the retcon, and nothing, nothing else. If it had provided actual context to why that decision had been good, I would have liked it. But this? It's like making Infinite Crisis two pages long, with a big splash page that's just Superboy Prime killing Kal-L. Regrettable decision, but it was done for the sake of the story rather than for the sake of... appealing to Quesada.

3540

Gaming / Re: I say GOOD things about your video games!

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:42:50 AM »

Aaaaaalrighty then.

...anyone up for my previously-said Elifoot 87 challenge? =P

3541

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:10:16 AM »

Uh... what?

(sigh)

You called him a [chameleon sting]er.
Spectro just said you two were brothers.
[chameleon sting]er implies one fucks his own mother in the original sense of the word.
She is your mother too.

...why do I need to explain these things?

3542

Off The Wall / Re: Post a Random Fact About Yourself

« on: June 10, 2010, 01:06:55 AM »

Sorry. I guess I got carried away there. No harm intended. ^w^;;

Apology accepted. I WOULD like to see some of your work sometime, though.

3543

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 10, 2010, 12:55:13 AM »

You know what? [tornado fang] you, ya [chameleon sting]er. [tornado fang] you.

She's your mother too you know.

3544

Off The Wall / Re: Post a Random Fact About Yourself

« on: June 10, 2010, 12:54:31 AM »

You think I don't know that? I'm sorry, but I don't need anybody telling me how to pursue my dreams. I never asked for any challenge. I was just saying something that I now greatly regret.

I wish I never brought this up. Every time I open my mouth I just get myself into trouble.

Then stop whining. When people whine on net forums, they normally either ask for advice, or help. I'm currently willing to help you with both, and tried to give you some encouragement. If you're gonna be rude and go "don't tell me how to live my life", then stop bitching about your life on internet forums and say how you're aiming to be the best writer around here if you don't want people to tell you things.

3545

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 10, 2010, 12:20:03 AM »

A friend of mine just spent half an hour on the phone with me complaining about how he's fallen for a girl and acts like she's rejected him before he even tried asking her out. And he refuses to even talk to her, instead constantly looking at her like some damn wierdo.

...for all that time, I just wanted to punch the guy's face. Why do people always complain about things without even trying to succeed at them? Do they expect us to feel sorry? I got half a mind to go up to his place and slap some sense into him.

3546

Off The Wall / Re: Post a Random Fact About Yourself

« on: June 10, 2010, 12:15:27 AM »

No, I mean wanting to be the best.

I know it's stupid and egotistical and stuff, but it's the one thing I had going for me. It's the one thing I had to aim towards. I can't draw amazingly like other people, I can't sing, I can't dance...all I can do is write. Without that, well, what do I have to strive towards? I don't show people my poetry in real life because most people don't understand it and I feel like a pretentious worm...I only show it here because I feel people can understand it better. It's not just a hobby, it's an outlet for my feelings. Sometimes it's the only thing that helps me not crawl into the corner and just cry in frustration. Besides that, I can't stand being part of the crowd. I want to stand out and make myself known in a unique way. I can't do that in real life because I'm restrained and people make fun of and bully me for it, so I have to do it here, online. I've never really been known for anything before, and if I could be known and remember as being that one really great writer, well, that would make me happy beyond words.

I feel like I've betrayed myself. I made a promise to myself that I would always follow my dreams and never give up hope, just like my avatar character would do. I made him not just because I wanted a powerful hero to star in my stories, but because he represents everything I wish I was but that I'm either too weak or scared or pathetic to become. I promised myself I would never give into despair and that I wouldn't let other people get to me, but look at me now. I feel empty inside over something as trivial as a little healthy competition. I feel stupid and whiny and selfish and disgusting, and I feel like I've betrayed my own ideals and done myself a massive injustice. I wish I was more like Lucky Starlight or Bon Jovi, somebody who doesn't let stuff like this bother him and who overcomes their personal demons and makes themselves known. But I'm just some guy who fancies himself a writer, and it's moments like that that really drag me down. Realising that I've forsaken my ideals more than I'd like to admit makes me feel empty and horrid inside. It's times like these I just want to break down and cry I know I can't win everything, and I accept that. I don't want to win everything. I just want to be known for something, but maybe that's just me being a selfish, greedy little fuckstart again.

And in the morning I'll feel fine again and forget about all of this [parasitic bomb] until it comes back to bite me in the ass again. Sometimes I wonder what I even bother for. Then I remember why. And then I forget again. It's a viscious cycle of idealistic dream-pursuing and being dragged back down to earth again, and sometimes I feel like hope itself has betrayed me.

"Hell would be easy if not for hope."

You think anybody's gonna fight for you to be the best besides yourself?

People who are the best spend less time complaining and more time working on it. If you truly want to be the best, you're gonna work on it, it doesn't matter if it's in a competition or in your own textbook, it doesn't matter if it's on the computer or in the dirtiest piece of paper you have. Just WRITE. I've been through tons of stupid little internships for several writers for years, wrote silly advertising and stuff I still blush by seeing. I got a few published articles, nothing much to show for it, and tons of pieces of fiction constantly updated day and night. I WRITE. Because that's the only thing you can do if you want to be the best at something. Doing it. Talking about it isn't going to help, nor thinking how you feel about it, nor trying to understand that feeling. If you want to be the best, fight for it. Don't mope around.

3547

Gaming / Re: The Official Pokémon Black & White Discussion Thread

« on: June 10, 2010, 12:10:20 AM »

Whoa. The freaking system for which it's going to be designed isn't even out yet.

I think...

This isn't a DS title, right?

As far as I know, it is.

3548

Gaming / Re: The Kingdom Hearts Thread

« on: June 09, 2010, 11:50:09 PM »

Looks like Paper KH to me.

Screenshots seem too damn varied to check.


EDIT: Looking at a trailer, it looks like the game won't be very demanding at all. It doesn't seem very fun, either...

3549

Off The Wall / Re: Post Pictures Of Yourself

« on: June 09, 2010, 11:48:29 PM »

Looking through my album for more stuff to post...

3550

Off The Wall / Re: Post a Random Fact About Yourself

« on: June 09, 2010, 11:42:45 PM »

No, I wasn't going to enter, I was going to host it and see if anybody would enter and...

Oh, forget it. It was a pretty stupid dream anyway, and life seems to enjoy showing me that following your hopes and dreams is a fool's game anyway. I try to prove it wrong, but what do I know...

"Wahwahwahwahwahwahwaaaah"

There are always people willing to write something nice. Wrangle up some of them, set a story type and topic, set the rules, and set the delivery date.

BTW, any of your work I can sample?