Jump to content

The Extra Credits thread!! EC is amazing!


big giant circles
 Share

Recommended Posts

Who do you think gets Wily out of prison every time?

Hell, Wily's teleportation pads are just his way of getting the blue boy's data so he can look at him under every angle. He shares that data with Light who then has a nice big collection of data.

But after a while, Light feels guilty, deletes everything and moves on. Until one night he gets an itch that regular porn can't scratch, and he frees Wily again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 543
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

you guys forget the very first episode of the Mega Man cartoon, where Light is showing a newly-built Mega Man a newly-built Roll.

Mega Man says "Wow! She's pretty!"

And then Light gets a shifty look in his eyes and says ".....yes."

It's right in the first gosh damn episode, people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always figured that Dr. Light was the pedophile robot maker. He made two kids, one boy and one girl, and they are clearly under-age designs.

To top it off, he made them to be siblings, and thus, himself the father. That makes it incestuous.

Finally, I think Light is well aware of Wily and his plans each time he attacks. Wily can't just dig up all those resources for making armies and robot masters without someone noticing. Light knows what he's doing, and lets it happen.

So when Wily shows up, Light sends Mega Man out to deal with him, leaving Roll with him all day long. It's his chance for sweet, sweet underage incestuous robo-poon.

Nope, doesn't click with me. Why make Megaman at all if all you're in it for is the robo-poon of Roll? Wily is easy enough to just get rid of in your off time (it's not like anyone would miss the power-hungry bastard), so why have Megaman at all?

Unless he wants both girl AND boy sex, which is perfectly plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course. Sometimes, robotic professors just want a little boy butt action.

Come to think of it, the original Astro Boy had some questionable butt action going on. Machine gun ass, the battery port in his anus, that one time he had to transfer power to another little boy robot and it basically became a sodomy scene...

Man, the 1960s version was really fucked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

two new eps and no posts i am dissapoint

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3350-Anonymous

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3524-Our-Oscars

Edit: Our Oscars was pretty good I've been longing for some sort of VG award ceremony that isn't horrible and contrived (like the spike tv vga) admittedly though i've never watched the GDC awards, and i've never heard of the interactive achievement awards.I'll be sure to check those out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Spike VG Awards is the most fucking pathetic thing you can watch on TV. It's filled with forced dialog from people that really don't belong on any awards show, let alone one that caters to certain mindsets such as video games. They run tired, cliched jokes and try sooooooooo hard to be funny and topical.

Then you have the awards. They might as well just give up all the pretense and call the categories more accurate names like "Most Shooting In an FPS", "Most Space Marines In a Game" and "Most Like Madden But Isn't Because We Already Gave It An Award".

It's the show's self-perpetuation that's the worst part. They know that the college brosky demographic is more likely to watch the Spike VGAs, so they nominate titles that appeal to them. All other genres are ignored purposely to garner more viewers.

It's such a terrible show. Fuck, my mom knows it's full of shit, and she can't even tell the difference between my GameBoy and my DS.

/rant

EDIT: Oh wow, I just watched the video game awards episode and my thoughts parallel exactly with Sephire on the Spike VGAs. Like, exactly He put them nicer, but they're identical. He's jsut more polite about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Spike VG Awards is the most fucking pathetic thing you can watch on TV. It's filled with forced dialog from people that really don't belong on any awards show, let alone one that caters to certain mindsets such as video games. They run tired, cliched jokes and try sooooooooo hard to be funny and topical.

Then you have the awards. They might as well just give up all the pretense and call the categories more accurate names like "Most Shooting In an FPS", "Most Space Marines In a Game" and "Most Like Madden But Isn't Because We Already Gave It An Award".

It's the show's self-perpetuation that's the worst part. They know that the college brosky demographic is more likely to watch the Spike VGAs, so they nominate titles that appeal to them. All other genres are ignored purposely to garner more viewers.

It's such a terrible show. Fuck, my mom knows it's full of shit, and she can't even tell the difference between my GameBoy and my DS.

/rant

Winning.10char

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3555-The-Role-of-the-Player

Edit: YES wow ...very very good episode i've pondered the concept of the role of the player within a videogame for some time,i've come to alot of the same conclusions within this episode and tried to explain this idea to people who don't play videogames much (with limited results) this episode explains it alot better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The less the game industry tries to emulate the film industry, the better. The more overlapping between the two means a continuous stream of games going for "cinematic experience" while sacrificing the very thing that made them games in the first place: being a GAME.

It's like Killer7, which was more about watching the cutscenes than playing its mediocre rails-shooter segments. Or Other M, which was more about watching Sakamoto's shitty fanfic than playing its mediocre Metroid segments.

Games don't need an "Oscars" because that will do the same thing to the game industry that happened to the film industry- making pretentious hollywood garbage that tries to be "deep" and "meaningful" when it in fact is hamfisted and acted out by overhyped hollywood blowhards. The Oscars are merely a circle-jerk by the academy, patting itself on the back for another good year of trash.

Heck the film industry, for the most part, hasn't had an original bone in its body since the early 90s, and that's being generous to the 90s!

Stuff like the GDC is exactly the type of "award show" the game industry should have, and nothing more inspired by the Oscars or the like. The VGA is the opposite- pure shit shit shit sshhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing bad about games coming out every now and then that try to emulate a cinematic feel. It can be a cool novelty. Just as we get movies sometimes that aim for a comic book presentation/narration. But the AAA spectrum of games has just gone completely overboard with this now. Imagine if every big Hollywood movie coming out was the same as Sin City. Would you really like that? Games are now at the point where this is no longer a novelty, it's the standard.

Each medium should strive to its own strengths and what makes them unique, not some sort of self-loathing. It saddens me how little thought is put into innovating player-driven narratives (or player-driven worlds when it comes to MMOs). If a game is built mainly around cutscenes and railroaded scripted scenery I will not buy it, no matter how well made it is. This type of experience just fails to excite me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a game is built mainly around cutscenes and railroaded scripted scenery I will not buy it, no matter how well made it is. This type of experience just fails to excite me.

Tell that to all the "enthusiast" and "journalist" press that thinks games need to be cinematic so that people will take their hobby/obsession seriously.

You ever read the ridiculous stuff Game Inform, er, GameStop magazine writes? In the Editor's front page or the articles? It absolutely stuns me how ridiculous games seem to be getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screwattack.com has a nice rating system. It goes like this:

Buy it! - It's good, or great, or even awe-fucking-some. You should buy it because it is worth buying.

Rent it! - It's not really worth owning, but you can still get some enjoyment out of it. Find it, rent it, play it, return it.

F*** it! - It isn't worth playing. It may just be a terrible game overall, or suffer from one or more distinct flaws.

(Now, they recently reviewed LoZ: OoT 3D for the 3DS, and gave it a "F*** it!" score, because the reviewer felt it was pointless to get, as he felt the N64 and GameCube versions were good enough. He did like the updates and thought some of the new stuff was cool, but his personal preference was for the older versions. It's a site that likes its nostalgia and retro games, so take it as you will.)

Any way, the three-point scale is kind of vague, but it's also quite direct and to the point: If it's worth getting, get it. If it's not worth getting, don't bother with it. I like that.

The worst part is that I had almost the exact same idea years ago, but I thought no one would ever take it seriously. :-?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I think game blogger Alex Kierkegaard is an insufferable blowhard (with a misplaced devotion to Nietzsche to boot! The man quite honestly fancies himself the Zarathustra of gaming!), I think he has a lot of worthy criticisms of the game industry, and game journalism at large.

He says, at its most basic, game reviews should have the basic ranking of

Favorable

Ambivalent

Unfavorable

And you could POSSIBLY expand that with the inclusions of Very Favorable and Very Unfavorable.

Anything beyond that is just muddying the waters (and it's true, using the 10-point scale means nearly every game will be above 6.0, making the scale essentially worthless). As the video pointed out, this essentially makes the out-of-ten system worthless save for metacritic.

As also noted, since major game sites are paid by game-companies, you will rarely find honest critique there.

One thing that makes me annoyed about most game review sites is their principle of shifting around reviewers to cover different game genres. In theory, this is not a bad idea, as allowing different perspectives on a genre can be useful.

However, when you have a meathead whose only expertise is in FPSes try to review, say, an arcade shmup, or a platformer, you are going to get a biased THIS GAME IS NOT WHAT I AM USED TO LIKING THEREFORE IT SUCKS 6/10 bullshit that tarnishes the scores of so many games... much like IGN's infamous shitty and wretched review of God Hand, giving the game a 3/10 (yet they still found the gall to put it on one of their innumerable 'Top 100-or-so Games' lists that comes out every five months and SERVES ABSOLUTELY NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER).

People who are well-versed in a particular genre are more capable of reviewing that genre (and as the video states, pointing out similarities for the reader) than those not well-versed.

I could not give you an accurate review of a FPS, since the amount i've played is limited, to only a few of the "classics" like Doom etc, and a few Xbox shooters. I am not in a good position to tell you which FPS to buy.

I have played a lot of shmups, platformers, and RPGs though! I could tell you a lot about those!

But we continually see game journalism sites (or just the uneducated fuckwits at sites like Destructoid) try to tell you which games are "deserving" of your money, when those games are just big-budget shitfests like FFXIII that are not worth playing.

I think game journalism needs a massive rehaul myself, but some will feel free to disagree.

I chuckled at the mention of discussion on Braid, because if there's a game that does NOT deserve discussion, it's that crappy, boring game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we continually see game journalism sites (or just the uneducated fuckwits at sites like Destructoid) try to tell you which games are "deserving" of your money, when those games are just big-budget shitfests like FFXIII that are not worth playing.

I think game journalism needs a massive rehaul myself, but some will feel free to disagree.

I chuckled at the mention of discussion on Braid, because if there's a game that does NOT deserve discussion, it's that crappy, boring game.

Half the time Destructoid posts garbage to get page hits or to seem funny when they really aren't. The only videos I ever watch is "Hey Ash Watcha Playin?" or "The Jimquisition" the latter because often times Sterling can have a good point in the video.

Destructoid is Atlus ho for sure. They've been obsessing over that stupid Caroline game (I'm sorry I'm sick of hearing about it). I honestly can't wait for that game to flop and Destructoid blame it's readership for not picking it up.

Braid was a hyped up bore fest that justified Microsoft's $15 price tags, and now that's considered cheap to their new junk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Braid was a hyped up bore fest that justified Microsoft's $15 price tags, and now that's considered cheap to their new junk.

Dunno why there's suddenly all this hate for Braid -- while the plot was trying to be more complex than it actually was, the gameplay mechanics and puzzles were excellent...well worth the $15 price of admission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...