The Damned

Also, the progress from high-end steam engines to early 20th century internal combustion engines was only like 60 years. Hell the development from the hot air balloon to the fixed wing aircraft wasn't that long either, and with a war to push the development even faster, it makes sense that someone would eventually figure it out. They had large cities well before Korra (Ba Sing Sa, the Earth Kindgom capital, as well as the Fire nation capital), and they all had the same basic layouts: streets, shops, parks, big capital buildings, etc. It's not that hard at all to imagine how they might build a city like that. New York City was already becoming a skyscraper kind of town back in the 1880s. Here's a photograph from then to prove it: So, from the end of Last Airbender to Korra, it's been about 60 or so years. They progressed from steam to gas engines, hot air balloons to airplanes, and made big modern-style cities, all in realistic time frames.

I am interested in the 3DS XL, but as someone that hardly ever uses their regular 3DS, I can't justify the purchase even if I can easily afford it. It just seems wasteful to have two of them, when I can't really be bothered to use one at any given moment. Maybe when more 3DS games I can be interested in come out later this year and into next year... (And before anyone asks, I have multiple 3DS games, including most the highly rated ones, so it's not a matter of "Oh, you just need to play this game and this game and then you'll love your 3DS again". It's a matter of I've already played them, so don't bother suggesting games I already have)

Oh my god, when they fight the giant robot in episode 15, you will not believe our eyes what Linn does to it. It's all like "ZZHAAAAAAM!" and then Linn goes "ARRRRRRRRRRRR!" and then Korra manages to push it over and then together they both make it go "RRRRRRRRMMMMMMMMMMM!" and then they stop it from destroying the city. Best finale EVER. Oh, and spoilers.

Yeah. Stick with single-player PC and you're good.

Even the smaller cons are getting like that now. Everyone learned that a con is basically having fans pay to be advertised to by some studios and companies. Even the old local anime convention, Animethon, is all business and promotions. It used to be like this: from years 1 to about 13, it was a con in name only. It was far more like a film festival. Anything anime and even live action stuff was played. All the anime clubs from around would pool their resources, tapes/DVDs and money to rent out a section of the collage downtown. They would use the classrooms with projectors (and sweet, sweet air conditioning) and run shows from morning to night, all weekend long. Admission was free, later free with a donation to the food bank, and there was a small section for merchandise. You wanted to go see what the dealers room had? No problem, just walk over and look for yourself. It was all open and public. Hell, they got the Japanese ambassador to come by and speak at the opening ceremony for about five yours in a row. That's some community shit going on there. Does SDCC have foreign dignitaries speaking at them? No. Than right around 2004-ish, things changed. The people that started Animethon decided to hand it over to younger members of the clubs, because they were getting older, they had lives to start, family, etc. The new staff... they were approached by local stores, stores that did con circuits, and some of the anime companies. They wanted to make it a real convention. The next year, for the first time ever, they were charging for tickets to get in. They started at $35 for general admission. This didn't include the dealers room, nor the dance at night, nor some of the other sections. Those were extra. They also had a cap for people to enter, so it was possible to just not get in, even if you were willing to pay for what had always been a free event. This year, the tickets start at $20 for just one day. ONE DAY. Here's a link to the ticket prices. There's one for $125, for fuck's sake. Oh, but if you pre-register, you can get it for only $99. They don't show anime anymore. There are no rooms set aside for viewing. The only place you can sit is at the panels, which never happened except for a few times over the years, and then, it was just the con staff and some local businesses. Now it's straight up con panels, just like the ones in the article above. If you want to attend different parts of the convention, you have to buy a higher price ticket to get into them. I talk to some of the guys that founded the thing back in the 90s. Most of them have moved on from that sort of thing, but a few still follow it, and they don't like what it's become. One guy said he wished they never handed it over to the newer staff. It's sad, because the old con was a place I met people, socialized (and we all know I need all the help I can get in that area), found out about new shows/shows I never heard of before, had a rather memorable encounter with a Inuyasha fangirl that I really wish I had followed up on afterwards (stupid younger me), met an old friend I hadn't seen in years (and was somewhat sure was dead at that point), and other things. All because it was accessible to everyone. The worst part is, if you try to make anything like it, all the companies will try to make it into another con like all the others. The days of smaller cons is gone, and we're worse off for it. No, wait. The worst part is that it didn't have to be this way. The staff could have said "no, we want to keep it public and open, so everyone can enjoy it," but they decided to make it a business instead of a community event. But maybe I'm just old and bitter.

Yeah, so I got Borderlands. I'm about 12 or so hours total so far, and at level 21. I will just assume that is normal. Otherwise I fear I have put too much effort and time into it. I do like setting things on fire with fire guns. Fuck all the other kinds, fire shootems is bestest.

Nah. There are 12 steps in that sort of thing, and we all know we'll never see step 3.

I never said it was just the OST. I just went with the one that had the best coverage. Besides, aside from people that are really into a game, it's not easy to know and find the soundtrack to one.

There are about anywhere from 500 to 10000+ people playing L4D2 on Steam at any given point. Case in point: just now, I looked up the game, and it lists L4D2 as having a peak of over 12000 players just today. Right now, it's just under a 1000. I play regularly, and I know there are other players out there. Even when Steam can't find an empty spot in a current game, it will let me start one, and you're going to have at least one other player pop in not long after. L4D2 is a safe bet. Dead Island, I can't say because I've never really bothered with it. Oh, and speaking of L4D, if you have either 2 or 2, and want to try it out but fear random jackassess, PM me. I have no problem helping new players learn the maps and tricks. Ask the other people here that play Left 4 Dead.

Go watch it. It's by the same people and covers some of the stuff and characters you see in Korra. Also, it's really good. But don't see that piece of shit live action movie they did. If you've already seen it by now, go back in time and stop yourself from watching it. Even if you have to risk tearing the space-time continuum a new everything by slapping yourself repeatedly, don't let your past self watch it.

Obviously a industry-wide conspiracy to keep it from being made. Have all the big shots like Penny Arcade and /vg/ stop it before it can take over. Don't you sheeple see? THEY want you to think it will be a failure. If you think it, you believe it! IF you believe it, it becomes TRUE! Fight the power! ... OK, but seriously, this thing seems perfect for ROMs. It has the necessary power and open development to make for one hell of a retro game system emulator.

Doesn't Origin have "deals", where they offer a game and DLC and some other stuff, all in one package, at a price lower than the separate prices combined? That's kind of like a sale, I would think. So, if EA drops the price on their games to get more people to buy it, it's a business strategy. If it's Valve, it's ruining the industry. Got it. Thanks for making that make sense, EA. I was worried for a minute.

Holy shit, portal 2 for $5. That's a deal no matter what. Also, if you haven't gotten most (or even all) of them yet, the Value Complete pack is only $50. Ususally it's $100, and even then, that's still a good deal, because with it, you get the following: Counter-Strike, Team Fortress Classic, Day of Defeat, Deathmatch Classic, Half-Life: Opposing Force, Ricochet, Half-Life, Counter-Strike: Condition Zero, Counter-Strike: Condition Zero Deleted Scenes, Half-Life: Blue Shift, Half-Life 2, Counter-Strike: Source, Half-Life: Source, Day of Defeat: Source, Half-Life 2: Deathmatch, Half-Life 2: Lost Coast, Half-Life Deathmatch: Source, Half-Life 2: Episode One, Portal, Half-Life 2: Episode Two, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, Left 4 Dead 2, Portal 2 ALL FOR $50.

In case someone was interested but has no idea what the original music is like.

So, any one want a sample of the music that will be on the CD that comes with the game (in Japan, that is)? No. Well, FUCK YOU, YOU'RE GETTING IT ANY WAY. !

If you go by this chart, it lists one game as having a budget of $40 million for making it, and then $200 million for marketing it. If that's accurate, I think we know where the bad decision-making started. If most games followed that trend, then you have a problem where the games aren't the real cost issue, it's trying to get people to know it exists. You really shouldn't be spending summer blockbuster movie budgets telling people your game exists. That can't be good business. Now, I know that people like use are on various sites, and we either actively follow news about games, or we stumble across them along our ways. And I do understand that there is a portion of the consumer base that isn't actively following a game constantly. But I do have to wonder at what point do you forget that you have a customer base that you know is following the game/series, and is very aware of it coming out (and may have already pre-ordered it or will buy it regardless of marketing), and you spend all that much more trying to tell people that might not even be aware of it. If they aren't following it, might that be because they aren't interested in it? I guess it's kind of a paradox: people that like it will get it, so advertising it heavily to them isn't necessary. But the people that the advertising is meant for are the ones that aren't necessarily going to be interested in it in the first place. Yes, some will buy it after the marketing kicks in, but at what point are you spending more and more money to get just a few more sells?

Yeah, that is right. I haven't played them. I'm going by images and videos I find online. I look at them and I watch them and I don't see the difference. Fine, we've argued this to death now. I don't see it, you guys do. Art on the two games is another thing I've having trouble picking the two apart from. I see very similar aspects in both games. I don't see what the two deal with differently to make them distinct. Team Fortress 2 versus,say... any other game, the art stands out. There's no mistaking either one for the other. But Battlefield and Modern Warfare are so close I don't see what sets them apart. The Avengers movie cost as much as Star Wars The Old Replublic. Avengers made all that back in the first week of sales. TOR took how long? If they even did? And people wonder why studios are folding so much these days.

I don't understand how you can. It's not a matter of eyesight or clarity or any of that. I don't need glasses (work requires a rather comprehensive vision test every year as part of qualification, including some sort of retina mapping thing to make sure we aren't just guessing and cheating... it's not comfortable and I would advise against it if you are asked to do it. It involves pressing stuff against yourlens and blinding you with lights for five minutes). Nor do I have some agenda, as I don't play any of those games (and in fact hardly play anything these days). If this was about gameplay, I wouldn't even bother talking right now, as I know I have experience to comment on it. But looking at something isn't about experience or loyalty to a series or any of that. Both those games look so close to each other, I can't really tell the difference between them. I see soldiers in some place, I see them doing things, and I don't get how one is supposed to look better than the other. Even if I look at the highest resolution images available, and I zoom in and pan around, I still just see two images that offer nothing to distinguish themselves from each other.

ocre was kind enough to provide the link to the article in question. http://www.notenoughshaders.com/2012/07/02/the-rise-of-costs-the-fall-of-gaming/

One is slightly browner. Good point. Never mind the fact they both have the same settings, the same guns, they same uniforms, the same basic characters models, the same vehicles, the same physics, the same plots, the same events. But yeah, one is slightly browner. Excellent counterpoint. I don't ignore it. I don't see it.

and versus and Yeah, real different. Some series are stuck on graphics so badly that it's becoming a financial sinkhole. EA is offering all kinds of "premium" packages that give you slightly more content for significantly more money. You're already paying $60 or more for just the game, and then they ask you to pay $10 or more for slightly better server access. Why are they offering this? Because they can't afford not to. Here's a crazy idea: why not offer better server access to everyone by putting some more money towards servers? Instead of, you know, spending five years and $50 million making a barely better-looking game engine.

Someone posted a link on the irc channel, I wish I could remember where it was so I could post it here. Basically, it stated that the drive towards higher and higher budget games (budgets swollen by the industry-perceived need for better and more graphic detail/realism/whatever, as well as other issues, but more money and resources being devoted to graphics was often stated by both developers and publishers) was steadily killing larger studios and making it harder for smaller ones to even survive, let alone compete. It looked at the need for a game to recoup its development cost by selling 3 or more million copies to just break even. To just break even. Not turn a profit, but to make back what they spent on it. A part of the article was quotes from people about the rising cost and how it would be cheaper to make games on something like the Wii U or Android/iOS devices. I figured such an article would fit in well, both in regards to the topic in general and the current graphics stuff. If anyone has the link to the article, please post it. I think most people here would find it an interesting read.

Hey, someone took down my tacky meme for Liontamer... Was it a touch too NSFW?

I sent an email from my missingno tracks email address to bandcamp, with links to as many things as I could fit to make sure there was no mistake. I would hope that with enough emails to them, they will respond appropriately and quickly.

Wait, he changed his name to willtechno? Son of a bitch, I just got this engraved for him, and now it's fucking useless. Happy birthday, you name changing bastard.