logo Sign In

I'm sorry, but I must say this... screw this forum, and screw the entertainment industry — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar

Mine was for the Super Nintendo. Yours?


I missed out on that, but I got the basically Identical GBA version.

Quote
Even with the cracks in the walls, the game is harder than most games released today.
I'll agree that the sword beam is weak, but it is much easier to hit your target than it was in LoZ.


Can't say I ever had a problem hitting people with the original beam, so I wouldn't know.
Personally, I don't consider "Hit, block, wait for an opening, hit again, and then use this same general strategy on 98% of all enemies in the game" to be fun. And just to say this now... I personally consider the Gameboy installments of the Zelda series to be the worst ones (not counting the CD-i ones, which I've never played).


Oracle of Ages was great. I've never quite finished Seasons because I got stuck. Meh, but Ages was far from the worst instalments. *Shrugs* to each his own I guess. If you hate puzzles, then there's nothing that's gonna make you like the newer Zelda's, and I didn't say it was hard to hit a target in LoZ, but the AlttP beam was much wider. As for Zelda 64. I dunno. It seems archaic today, but it was the first game to use such a system when previous 3D games had no targeting systems at all or just plain atrocious ones. It may not be perfect in retrospect, but it paved the way for some excellent combat engines like Prince of Persia, Ninja Gaiden, Mark of Kri, and even Wind Waker.

Quote
Most of the reason I liked the first Zelda was because of how many ways you could approach enemies--with your sword, with your bow, with your bomb, etc. I've honestly had situations where I was surrounded and used all sorts of desperate measures. In LttP, it seems like only the sword is good as a practical weapon. Everything else tended to be used more for solving puzzles than fighting, and some items (such as the bomb) were modified to the point that they were now USELESS as weapons--by the time that stupid bomb went off, whoever you were trying to blow up is all the way across the screen. In general the side-weapons are only useful if they're an enemy's specific weakness. Don't get me started on how the boss battles became hopelessly pattern-centric...


If you haven't noticed, nearly ever video game boss is pattern centric, even the ones in the first Zelda. Enemies didn't have AI back then, they had patterns and part of the challenge was cracking them. Granted the bomb is usless as a weapon, but it's not intended to be one. It's a device to open doors that happens to be lethal, not a rocket launcher. What do you have against swords anyway? In the first Zelda, pretty much all you could to was attack straight on(no matter what weapon, they were all direct), and once you got behind or beside an enemy, there was no more strategy than that. No blocking, nothing, and the sword could only jab, which is lame. The boomerang could stun, but it does the same in all the Zelda games, so there's onething that hasn't 'deminished'.. Granted it all of LoZ worked for '87, when it was fresh and new, but not today. That's why the re-release for the GBA got mostly middling reviews.


Quote
I'm sick of hearing people complain about rotten tomatoes. Should they stop complaining, or should the farmer growing said tomatoes start selling them fresh?


Pessimist. There are plenty of good games and shows out there even if you don't like the direction old franchises are taking. My point is if you hate it, then stop complaining and try something else. Don't say "Screw this forum" as if we're the problem.

Quote
Heh. I recently got Minish Cap from a friend of mine. He outright gave it to me simply because he couldn't stand it anymore, and told me as much himself. That sure gives me a boost of confidence -__- (I haven't played it yet, by the way).


The Minish Cap's dungeons are good, but the overworld relies way too much on sidequests and riddles. Still it's worth a shot for the first two dungeons alone if it was just given to you.

4

Author
Time
Post link
BTW, this has pretty much devolved into an Off Topic thread, so it might ought be moved or locked.

4

Author
Time
Post link
testing to see if its been locked
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
well, I agree that james or jamie or whatever his name is needs to get out more. There is far more to life than entertainment such as movies, tv show, cartoons, video games and music. Whatever works of art man creates, it will never compare to the majesty of God's creation. (And no I'd really not like to debate THAT subject, just agree to disagree. k.) Go out with your friends go play some ball with 'em. or just cruise around and window shop. Do somethin besides staying coped up indoors all day.

Aside from that, lets get down to the naked truth about the entertainment industry. The are a business. That's why they are called an industry. And to my knowledge, a business is only out for one thing, money. If that money is somehow connected to your tastes or anything else, they will use whateverr means they can to exploit that and reel you in hook, line, and sinker. It's happened to everybody on this board at least once in their lives. Some i'm sure more than they'd care to admit. Now that lead to...

When most of us on this board first saw star wars, we were pretty young. I wasn't even born when the first one came out. I saw it when it was re-released with ESB. As such, when you are young, you are very impressionable. Everything makes a mark on you because you are still absorbing information without filtering any of it. As you grow older, you develop filters. these come about due to experiences that you've had in your life, mainly negative ones. Anyway, you embraced star wars and still hold it dear because of this. It left a very strong impression on you, and now that your older, the new ones have not. In reality, it partly has to do with this and partly with personaly tastes.

All in all, shirmaa is right. You do need to grow up and that's what change is an indicator of, that you've grown up.
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa

Quote
WTF that is the kinda short sight idoit comment that i would expect from an individual like you.


And this is the kind of response I would expect from someone who is illiterate.

Quote
why the f*ck would you give a baby crap, and secondly what the f*ck does that have to do with a TV show. seriously man if you are try to compare the too think of something a lil more accurate. I understand that you frustrated with media nowadays but if you want to be takin seriously use a better comparison.


You were trying to argue that I only thought the new Star Wars movies sucked because "my perception has changed" and that kids who hadn't seen the original movies still liked it. I used the crap-eating comparison to try and show you that the case may very well be that since they haven't seen the originals, they don't have a basis for comparison.

I'm sure you're the only one who didn't understand the reasoning behind that.

Quote
Wow so your telling me that you havent grown up since you were ten,


Perhaps not, but I do a much better job of hiding it than you.

Quote
you preception changes as you grow older, its just a fact,


Just like "Four legs good, two legs bad" I'll wager.


Quote
you are a different person now then you were when you were ten, why cus people change. wow you played all the zelda back to back man you need to get out more, thats alot of game play. and as for Starwars, you'll you will never beable to watch the PT movies from the POV that you watched the originals, the reason why you still like the originals is cus they captured your attention when you were little. the PT will never do that cus you watched the for the first time after you had matured.


They'll never capture my imagination because they sucked.

Seriously, I guess this "change of perception" stuff also explains why I don't like Starship Troopers or the theatrical Lost in Space movie either, right?

And maturity has nothing to do with one's tastes in entertainment, unless of course your one of those pussies who had to play with G.I. Joes in the closet because people would give you a wedgie if you actually admitted to liking them in public.

Quote
well lets see i have read the book once a year since i was hmm 10. i have done projects on the book, for school i have done biographies on tolkien, i know the boks inside out. that what i base my assertion on. as for ralph Bakshi's version, yes i personally liked it, however all the stuff he did with the orcs the half cartoon half constume shit was stupid, also not finishing is a big indicator on how good some people thought the movie was.


I agreed with you up until the last comment. Bakshi had tried to fit the entire trilogy into one movie, but the studio crapped out on him and forced him to release it in incomplete form--this also explains some of the live action/animation mix. Just compare the animation quality to one of his finished films, such as Wizards, and you'll see what LOTR could've been.

Quote
and dont tell me that it did a good job of portraying the books, because he never finished the hard part of it. the fellowship and the first half of TTT are the easiest parts to adopt from the book cus there is lots of imagery. but ROTK had alot of events that happen quickly and close together, that dont take much time in the book but take alot of time in the movies. But man you can't compare his version to PJs version why cus they were made in different times, by different people, in different mediums, and with different bugets.


But they're both adaptations of the same book. Saying I can't compare them is like saying I can't compare Street Fighter II to Street Fighter III.

Quote
i was accounting for that man but your right it wouldnt be 30 hrs long a direct tranlation of the books into a movie would be at least 15hrs.


Considering that the extended versions of the PJ films run for something like nine hours altogether, I think I could've put up with some extra material. I still don't think that estimate is correct, however.

Quote
you cannot expect people to go and see a 15 hr movie,


Of course not. That's why the theatrical versions were severely shortened.

Quote
mm. abysmal revivals yeah so thats why lotr gross over a billion dollars, and made history but winning so many awards, that is why spiderman is a good movie right, or why shows like beasties were good, yeah man that is why these revivals are failures.


Yes, let's not overlook the new He-Man (which lasted two seasons then bombed), or the OTHER Transformers shows, such as R.I.D. (though in truth, Transformers doesn't really count as a "Revival" because to revive, you have to be DEAD first, and Transformers never really died--it's just one of those franchises that won't go away. Spider-Man is in this boat too, actually).

Quote
are a very shortsight and selfish individual, if entertaining the youth of today is the raping of your childhood, then so be it. man i feel like beating the shit out of you for being so selfish.


The youth of today have their own shows. They don't need to be making custom versions of my heroes. I mean, I'm sure they wouldn't like it if I made an 80s-style version of Yu-Gi-Oh.

Author
Time
Post link
Before I continue, let me say this:

I first saw Star Wars when I was fifteen. I saw it on some cable channel. I don't "hold it dear," I DO however respect it the same way an art lover respects the Mona Lisa. If someone wanted to repaint the Mona Lisa so that it now resembled an anime girl, would all of you be perfectly kosher with that?

Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Oracle of Ages was great. I've never quite finished Seasons because I got stuck. Meh, but Ages was far from the worst instalments. *Shrugs* to each his own I guess. If you hate puzzles,


For future reference, I'm a King's Quest fan, so I obviously don't hate puzzles.

Then again, I don't consider "push block into proper place" to be much of a puzzle, either.

Quote
If you haven't noticed, nearly ever video game boss is pattern centric, even the ones in the first Zelda. Enemies didn't have AI back then, they had patterns and part of the challenge was cracking them.


Yes, but the pattern had more random and varied elements--the Gohma had to be shot in the eye, true, but you never knew how many fireballs from those statues would be flying at you when the eye was open, so it's possible to miss the deadline because you had to avoid getting hit. Contrast that to OOT, where you have to be a hopeless scrub to fail at defeating Gohma.

Quote
Granted the bomb is usless as a weapon, but it's not intended to be one. It's a device to open doors that happens to be lethal, not a rocket launcher. What do you have against swords anyway?


Nothing. I do have something against a lack of variety, however. The bomb may not have been intended as a weapon, but that it could be used as one does a lot to make the game more entertaining.

I once had a situation where I took out two octoroks with one bomb... and I was in a position with little manueverability, one of those classic "looks like there's no way out" situations. It was a relief I even managed to escape the blast radius of the bomb (much less get some heart refills out of the exchange). It sounds tame describing it, but in the game it was a very tense moment... the kind I have never felt in a later Zelda game.

Quote
In the first Zelda, pretty much all you could to was attack straight on(no matter what weapon, they were all direct),


Nope. Bomb was not direct--it could be layed anywhere and damaged anything in a set proximity. and the Boomerang could be thrown all across the room and even diagonally.

Quote
and once you got behind or beside an enemy, there was no more strategy than that.


Unless, of course, they turned around. Let's also not forget that you usually faced multiple foes at a time, and usually in varied groups--it's much harder to slash slash slash away at a Moblin or Wizzrobe when there's an annoying Like Like sneaking up on you.

Quote
No blocking,


There was blocking, it was just done automatically (the shield would automatically deflect projectiles, assuming they hit the shield and not Link's sprite).

Quote
Granted it all of LoZ worked for '87, when it was fresh and new, but not today. That's why the re-release for the GBA got mostly middling reviews.


It got mostly middling reviews because the reviewers would rather oggle over the FMV of the next Final Fantasy game than play an actual game. I haven't read the LoZ reviews in particular, but I have read ones for the GBA Rerelease of Metroid. They tended to be pathetic, predictable crap about how "badly designed" the game was because, you know, you had to find secret passages and stuff. Yea, it worked fifteen years ago, and doesn't work now. That's because gamers weren't scrubs fifteen years ago.

Then again, those are the same reviewers who need a walkthrough to beat Dragon Warrior (even though the game tells you what to do if you bother to talk to the townspeople).

Quote
There are plenty of good games and shows out there even if you don't like the direction old franchises are taking. My point is if you hate it, then stop complaining and try something else. Don't say "Screw this forum" as if we're the problem.


Actually, I said "screw this forum" because everyone here agrees there is a problem, yet pussyfoots on doing anything about it.

Remember when everyone suggested boycotting the DVDs? Remember when most of those people caved in and bought the DVDs anyway? By caving in, they basically stated that Star Wars was nothing more than a product to them, and that George Lucas can dick us around if he wants--if he made a version of SW where every character was an Ewok, people would threaten to boycott it and then buy it too. By extension, the rest of the entertainment industry has also gotten the idea that they can dick us around.

Did you know Sony recently tried to defend a hardware defect by claiming it was an artistic decision? The precedent was set by Lucas (except in his case it was a software defect), who so far has gotten away with it. The fans have to let the higher-ups dick them around before the higher ups can get away with it.

People treat the corperations like they're some unbeatable monster. They're not. They're buildings with a name. In those buildings are flesh and blood people, just like you and me. They have families and friends, loves and losses. They're not supermen. If you prick them, they bleed and file a lawsuit, just like you would do. They have no more power than what you give them.

You call me a pessimist. Why shouldn't I be, in a world where the complainer gets attacked instead of the object of his complaints? You said it yourself--instead of complaining about someone selling rotten tomatoes, I should just buy something else. Why? If enough people knew about the rotten tomatoes, the guy selling them would either have to shape up or go out of business.

That people think it's lifeless of me to care about entertainment is really kind of sad. Come on, what does the average adult do on weekdays? He (or she--I'm not sexist, but the English language is) works. He works for money. He needs money to buy stuff. Half of that stuff (unless he's really scraping for cash) is going to be entertainment. The intention of entertainment is quite obvious. Seriously, I don't see why people degrade it's role--without entertainment, all you have left is to work, eat, sleep, work, repeat until you die. Yes, there's other things to do besides watching movies, playing video games, and reading books. I admit, I do enjoy occasional walks, playing with my cats, or throwing frisbees for my dog, and no video game or movie scenery will ever beat mother nature. But everything loses it's appeal with over-exposure. I could joyride with my friends, and sometimes I do, but that wastes gas which in turn wastes money and sometimes you need to be practical about that. Besides that, most of the outdoor activity I enjoy is really season-specific. You can't swim in winter, and the fair only comes once a year (and I usually miss it). So what's left?

Movies, books, and games.

Yea, I could just stick to older movies and the stuff I prefer, but again that is like the man who sells rotten tomatoes--keeping quiet just lets the problem get worse. You let the market get over-saturated with bad tomatoes, and people won't be able to tell the bad from the good anymore. You let the entertainment industry dick you around, and soon we'll all be having televisions that don't work... and everyone will be saying it's an "artistic decision."

.... You know, there's nothing scarier th
Author
Time
Post link
"You do need to grow up and that's what change is an indicator of, that you've grown up. "

Again, the assumption that any change is a good one. Anakin Skywalker changed quite a bit between TPM and AOTC, and look where he ends up in ROTS. It took another change to undo the first.

Quote
Lucas: It's not as apparent in the earlier movies, but when you see the next trilogy, then you see the issue is, How do we get Darth Vader back? How do we get him back to that little boy that he was in the first movie, that good person who loved and was generous and kind? Who had a good heart. - Bill Moyers interview

Some changes are not always for the better.

"are a very shortsight and selfish individual, if entertaining the youth of today is the raping of your childhood, then so be it. man i feel like beating the shit out of you for being so selfish."

I can't get over how much this statement points the finger back at the individual who typed it. This thread is seriously done.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
I can't get over how much this statement points the finger back at the individual who typed it. This thread is seriously done.

how does it point the finger back at me. how am i being selifish?
Quote
I'm sure you're the only one who didn't understand the reasoning behind that.

oh i understood the reasoning, however i was saying using such an extreme example doesnt help you.
Quote
Just like "Four legs good, two legs bad" I'll wager.

i dont think anyone understood the relevence of that statement. i know what your saying but what does that have to do with changing perception.
Quote
But they're both adaptations of the same book. Saying I can't compare them is like saying I can't compare Street Fighter II to Street Fighter III.

your right you can compare them however you cant say one is better then the other because they were done in different times. it would be like comparing the modern version of Antigone to the sophocles version they were done in different times and with different mind one is not nessarily better then the other. But the bottem line as i said before is that bakshi's version wasnt complete. so we don't know how good/bad of a adaption it could have been.
Quote
Considering that the extended versions of the PJ films run for something like nine hours altogether, I think I could've put up with some extra material. I still don't think that estimate is correct, however.

ok so how long would your versions be. how much time would you need to put the entire trilogy on film unedited, and uncut.
Quote
Of course not. That's why the theatrical versions were severely shortened.

exactly that is why certain changes had to be made to the movie, to make it flow. to bring tolkiens expansive books into and intensive storyline. i be the first one to say that i wasnt please with the amount he added liv tyler into the mix, and how he used elves at helms deep rather then the rangers, but if PJ had used all of the characters that were suposed to be used he would have had to use alot of screen time to explain them. the changes that he made were his and they had reason behind them.
Quote
I'm sure they wouldn't like it if I made an 80s-style version of Yu-Gi-Oh.

I'm sure they would care if you make an 80s version of Yu Gi Oh, however no one would watch it so... you'd never see that happen.

post your response in the off topic section this thread is dead

DEAD THREAD, DONT POST HERE ANYMORE POST RESPONSES TO THIS THREAD IN THE OFF TOPIC FOLDER.

Author
Time
Post link
I wasn't trying to say that any change is good. I understand that we all have a choice to make on exactly how we will change our own lives though. We chose wether to change for the better or for the worse. I was simply stating that physically change is an indicator of growing up. Guess I should have been more specific. But on the maturity side of it. Wouldn't you want to change for the better? I mean, since you have the choice and the ability to do it, why not chose to change for the better? James seems to be very pessimistic and narrow minded in his view of the entertainment industry. Yes, I agree we weren't sending a good strong message to Lucas when we bought the DVD's, but the fact of the matter is they are just movies. They aren't some sacraed artifact that if tampered with would bring about the end of life as we know it. Anyhow, James need to just come up for air and enjoy life. That's all I'm saying. Arguing about something that 200 years from now won't mean diddly squat is just a waiste of the breath God gave ya.
"Who's scruffy-lookin'?" - Han Solo
"I wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself." -sybeman
"You know, putting animals in the microwave is not a good idea. I had to learn that one the hard way." -seanwookie
Author
Time
Post link
I know you said post in Off-Topic, but they're right... this thread is dead. After this post, I won't have anything more to say.

Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa

your right you can compare them however you cant say one is better then the other because they were done in different times.


Street Fighter II and Street Fighter III were made at different times. Am I not allowed to compare them and say one is better than the other?

While we're at it, Goldfinger and Tomorow Never Dies were made at different times too, so how come I'm not allowed to compare them? That seems rediculous to me--they're both in the same series, after all.

Or, how about a relevant example--according to you, I'm not allowed to compare the Original Trilogy to the Prequel Trilogy, because they were made in different times with different mindsets. Yea, they were... that's a large part of the reason people didn't like the PT and they're almost universally considered not as good as the OT.

It all comes down to quality. Everything else is irrelevent.

Quote
But the bottem line as i said before is that bakshi's version wasnt complete. so we don't know how good/bad of a adaption it could have been.


Sure we do. The film he released is a good indication of what we would've gotten had he been able to make a full film.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Street Fighter II and Street Fighter III were made at different times. Am I not allowed to compare them and say one is better than the other?

your not quite understanding what i am saying. its the same idea as comparing hockey players, you cant say a hockey that plays today and gets 50 goals isnt as good if not better then a player that got 70 goals in the 80s, why because it was easier to score back then.

Quote
Sure we do. The film he released is a good indication of what we would've gotten had he been able to make a full film.

i feel differently. why because the being of the book is the easiest part to adapt. it the later parts that get harder. you can't say one way was better then the other cause they were just two ways of doing the same thing. but you feel differently obviousely so just agree the disagree, and dont come on this site and blame us for the problem.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Shimraa
Quote
Street Fighter II and Street Fighter III were made at different times. Am I not allowed to compare them and say one is better than the other?

your not quite understanding what i am saying. its the same idea as comparing hockey players, you cant say a hockey that plays today and gets 50 goals isnt as good if not better then a player that got 70 goals in the 80s, why because it was easier to score back then.


... How? Excuse me for not keeping up with scores, but what, did the rules of Hockey change or something? If not, I would definitely say someone who scored 70 goals in the eighties is better than someone who scored fifty today. By the same token, someone who scores 100 goals today is easily better than someone who scored 70 in the eighties. It's just common sense.

Quote
Quote
Sure we do. The film he released is a good indication of what we would've gotten had he been able to make a full film.

i feel differently. why because the being of the book is the easiest part to adapt. it the later parts that get harder. you can't say one way was better then the other cause they were just two ways of doing the same thing. but you feel differently obviousely so just agree the disagree, and dont come on this site and blame us for the problem.


What I blame this forum for is saying they want Lucas to stop butchering Star Wars, and then going out and supporting his butchery.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar

What I blame this forum for is saying they want Lucas to stop butchering Star Wars, and then going out and supporting his butchery.


Okay, well what about people like me who realize that the point of this forum isn't to stop the butchering but to make sure the ORIGINAL CUTS are still available? You, like many people before you, have lost sight of the petitions original purpose. As far as I know it was never about stopping George Lucas from doing anything other than denying us our O-OT.

Admitedly, I've skipped over much of this thread seeing as how it's all just a bunch of stereotypical geek dick-waving. But you need to simmer down a bit and realize that not everyone is here for the same reasons you are. I bought the DVD releases the week they were released, and I don't make any excuses to you or anyone because I don't have to. I never said I was boycotting them and never intended to.

If you intend to stick around with that "fuck you" attitude though... well, I've been absent for a bit so I can only assume this board will still throw you out on your ass eventually.
For as much as some people claim to hate what Star Wars has become, they sure seem incapable of shutting up about it.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Rebel Rouser

If you intend to stick around with that "f*ck you" attitude though... well, I've been absent for a bit so I can only assume this board will still throw you out on your *ss eventually.


While I agree, that doesn't change that this was supposed to be a

DEAD THREAD

4

Author
Time
Post link
as for hockey what is different is the size of players, players are bigger now then they were then, the quality of the atheletes is better now and so skill has been blured. also you have different styles of play, in the 80s you had run and gun hockey, now it is all defensive you have the trap. in the 80s you didnt have video analysis, now you do. A goalie nwo adays in teh NHL will watch videos of opposing players inorder to learn there habits, this help's them predict where the shot is coming from and were it is going. So the rules havent changed but the times have, people player in different ways and do different things, to try and do the same thing 'win'.

DEAD THREAD JAMES IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TALKING HOCKEY GO TO THE HOCKEY THREAD IN THE OFF TOPIC SECTION.
Author
Time
Post link
James, while some of your points are valid, your phrasing certainly didn't help. I haven't seen such a hostle thread in some time. Is it wrong for someone to like something you find inferior? I'm a huge anime fan and there's this one anime I really disliked called Hellsing. It and the company that made it, Gonzo, are very popular at the moment. While I disagree on the quality of the show and the work of the studio itself, I sure as hell don't belittle the people that like it. People have different tastes. What sells nowadays may not match up with what one thinks should. Heck, you guys like Zelda, where I have no desire to touch any of it, as I don't particularly enjoy it. I have no problem with story-heavy RPGs, it's why I play them. While I hate the SEs and don't own the DVD, I still enjoy the EU, and don't mind the prequels. I don't mind people like Darth Chaltab who prefer the SE as long as they don't mind that I don't. That's all I ask.I grew up with the OOT, hence I'll always enjoy them more than the PT. I will admit, it can be frustrating to see people rave about something you think doesn't deserve it (like me and Gonzo) but in the end, you're going to live a very misarable life if you let it get to you like this.


Made for IE Forum's Episode III theme month - May 2005.

Author
Time
Post link
ok i dont think this thread has lived out its purpose seeing as it had out lived 3 deaths, so you can continue talking on the subject if you like. However i don't think it belongs in this folder so post your replys in the thread i made in the off topic section. Thank you.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Klingon_Jedi
James, while some of your points are valid, your phrasing certainly didn't help. I haven't seen such a hostle thread in some time. Is it wrong for someone to like something you find inferior? I'm a huge anime fan and there's this one anime I really disliked called Hellsing. It and the company that made it, Gonzo, are very popular at the moment. While I disagree on the quality of the show and the work of the studio itself, I sure as hell don't belittle the people that like it. People have different tastes. What sells nowadays may not match up with what one thinks should. Heck, you guys like Zelda, where I have no desire to touch any of it, as I don't particularly enjoy it. I have no problem with story-heavy RPGs, it's why I play them. While I hate the SEs and don't own the DVD, I still enjoy the EU, and don't mind the prequels. I don't mind people like Darth Chaltab who prefer the SE as long as they don't mind that I don't. That's all I ask.I grew up with the OOT, hence I'll always enjoy them more than the PT. I will admit, it can be frustrating to see people rave about something you think doesn't deserve it (like me and Gonzo) but in the end, you're going to live a very misarable life if you let it get to you like this.



The thing is, I'm not talking about people liking stuff I hate. My original post was about how stuff I like keeps getting effed with, and then people take this altered version and try to make it seem like a definitive edition--or at the very least, they support it, which raises the chances that other things I like will be tarnished in a similar manner. It also raises the chance that the new version will become the "definitive" version, and will lower the chance of the original both being released and being accepted. There's already a case in point of this: The movie "Bedazzled." The original 1968 version has not been released on DVD. The reason? Supposedly, because the company that owns the rights does not want it to compete with the remake that stars Brendon Fraiser.

Let's not forget Star Wars. As someone else noticed, the point of this petition and this forum is that the original version needs to be released on DVD. But how do you expect to accomplish that while at the same time supporting the new version? That's completely counter-productive. You're saying you want the old one, but your words have no weight because you are also saying you're willing to live with the new version. So Lucas gets to release his version of Star Wars, one which nearly everyone agrees is an inferior film.

Now, about Hellsing and Gonzo, yes they're popular. But do you ever meet people who tell you that if you don't like Hellsing, that you shouldn't be watching anime because "all anime is like Hellsing?"

I have in fact had this happen. I don't like it when anime is over-dependant on having huge explosions or how a lot of anime fight scenes tend to boil down to showing off a Street Fighter-esque special move as opposed to any real battle rythm or strategy. These complaints tend to be focused specifically on one subset of anime (Shonen, in particular), yet people act like I'm attacking the medium as a whole and tell me that I simply should not watch anime if I don't like certain cliches. I have had a similar instance happen in RPGs--in that genre, I look for gameplay just as much (often more) than I do storylines. I have played and enjoyed more than seventy RPGs across five consoles and a PC, yet because of my "gameplay is just as important as storyline" attitude, people assume that I know nothing about the genre or that I'm relatively new to it, and tell me I should not be playing RPGs. It's not so much the shows and games themselves I'm attacking as it is how they change people's (and the industry's) perceptions of those things, which in my experience results in lower standards, less willingness to experiment, and closed-minded points of view.

Oh, and to Shimraa: You can't just make a declaration and expect everyone to automatically listen unless you're a leader of some sort. Declaring that the thread is dead won't make it so. The thread dies when people involved run out of stuff to say, and that INCLUDES people who wish to constantly declare that the thread is "dead" because every time you say that, you're paradoxilly keeping the thread alive in your own small way.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JamesEightBitStar
Let's not forget Star Wars. As someone else noticed, the point of this petition and this forum is that the original version needs to be released on DVD. But how do you expect to accomplish that while at the same time supporting the new version? That's completely counter-productive. You're saying you want the old one, but your words have no weight because you are also saying you're willing to live with the new version. So Lucas gets to release his version of Star Wars, one which nearly everyone agrees is an inferior film.


Actually most of us don't care how much Lucas messes around with his movies, and are willing to live both versions... The petition is due to the fact that Lucas is releasing only the SSE. And as I've said before, I have no preference since Lucas has prevented me from seeing the original version.






Infact, I might like it better if he released the 97 version on DVD since that's the version I grew up with. He's raping my childhood too.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Hey James, BTW, are you the same JamesTheEightBitStar of the DBZOA.net forums???

4

Author
Time
Post link
hey james seeing as that i am one of the top long time posters on the site i do feel like i have a right to declare a thread dead or suggests its movement to a different folder. your right in taht i cant kill a thread parsay but its been a form of courtesy on this site from the being that if a thread is declared dead ppl dont post there. because its been called dead for a reason. but you may have noticed that in my last post i SAID that this thread isnt dead so i mearly said to move it to the off topic section WHICH IS WHERE IT BELONGS seeing as it conserns more then just SW. if you havea problem with that then take it up with jay i am sure he would agree. infact i think jay created an entire folder for this so it would go to the off topic folder but the Theatrical Cuts vs. Special Editions folder. so take your shit and put it in there.