xhonzi

CP3S said:

Throwing a baseball, some thumbtacks and a corkscrew together is one thing. Extensive stitching and cutting out patters is something else. I don't have the skills, or patience to make one.

Also, as bad as this things looks with the wrong coloring, any pictures of home made ones I've seen look a lot worse.

Now that I've been looking at it for a few days, it still looks really great. It looks exactly like the leather Songbirds in the game, only tar black. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the concept of designing something that accurate and detailed, then deciding the color didn't matter.

 

xhonzi said:

CP3S said:

 

But who is the 'song bird' of BS1?  Sander Cohen.

The Songbird of BS1 is obviously the Big Daddies.

I meant 'song bird' by name, not 'songbird' by function.

But if the Songbird = Big Daddies, then Handymen = X. 

Solve for X.

Not sure I understand the "by name" thing.

Don't overthink it.  I just meant that he writes music: therefore a 'song' 'bird'.  But he wears a rabbit mask... so... there you go.

Handymen seemed like they were going to be analogous to the Big Daddies, but they were more of a minor nuisance than a real challenge.

There were times I accidentally made Big Daddies mad, and nearly peed myself as they started coming after me, from there it is frantic running to buy myself some time, reload my weapons, and make sure I had everything I needed to take it down. I was disappointed the game provided nothing that gave me that sense of dread and excitement.

Handyman felt like a reskinned Brute Splicer with a limited area of vulnerability. They just didn't feel all that threatening.

But yeah, storyline wise, analogous... security bots?

Brute splicers and security bots?  You must have had an easier time with the handymen than I did.  I found them to be bullet sponges.  I could unload all the ammo I had in both guns and still not take them out.  I always liked fighting the Big Daddies, because I could plan out my attack.  They were brutal, but I thought they were fair.  For whatever reasons, the handymen seemed more 'cheap' to me than fair.

I've been replaying it on PC- actually playing Clash in the Clouds.  I've alternated betwixt mouse, xbox controller, and laptop touchpad.  It's a lot easier to hit the heart with the mouse than the other two...  that does make them easier to take out.

I know some people are really into finding a direct counterpart for every character, but I don't think there necessarily has to be.

Yeah... I think the game itself started it.  There's always a girl, always a lighthouse.  Plasmids/vigors... Comstock/Ryan.  It was on the surface, but the game narrative made it part of the lore.

 

xhonzi said:

While you're not wrong, I'm referring to "pretty much anyone you talk to 'was pretty disappointed by Bioshock Infinite'".  [sic Tobar]

Have you read the irrational forums?  Man, those guys are really upset.  (Or at least were... I haven't been over there in months.)  I go back to my lottery analogy... it's simultaneously triumphant and extremely disappointing.

I guess I haven't had the same "pretty much anyone you talk to" experience as you.

Two close friends of mine played it along side me when it first came out. They really liked it, but they aren't obsessed with BS like I am, more casual fans. I recommended it to a coworker who really liked the first two, and he really enjoyed it. And one day I dropped into a gas station to buy a few things and while making small talk with the cashier, he casually said, "Man, I can't wait to get home and play some Bioshock Infinite." Now we talk video games every time I go in there. He really enjoyed it as well. Pretty small pool of people, I suppose.

And I guess I haven't been reading the same forums and comments about the game as you. I think the only time I've ventured to online opinions about it has been to read discussions on quantum mechanics and theories, and anyone looking into the game that deeply probably really enjoyed it like I did. I've noticed grumbling naysayer threads at places, but I feel like every game has those, not everyone is going to like everything.

I think the people following its development were the ones to be most disappointed.  Only because the game they had been developing and the game they released are so different.  If you had no expectations based on trailers or the previous games in the 'series', you're far less likely to be disappointed.

I'm sure casual fans were happy enough.  They are probably also not the ones chomping at the DLC bit.  They've already moved on.  Also, the 'weak minded' who were gifted their rating by the jedi mink tricking reviewers who gave it a 94%, probably haven't come up with their own opinion.

CP3S said:

Well, I got my Songbird plush today.

<snip>

:(

 Make your own! 

CP3S said:

xhonzi said:

Tobar said:

I was pretty disappointed by Bioshock Infinite. The new story DLC has me excited though.

It reminds me of something... where they introduce a new spin on a beloved favourite... it's not well received, and they instantly return to the old formula.  Can't put my finger on it.

Not well received? It made huge sells figures and received favorable reviews pretty much around the board. In general it has more favorable ratings than Bioshock 2 (check metacritic).

While you're not wrong, I'm referring to "pretty much anyone you talk to 'was pretty disappointed by Bioshock Infinite'".  [sic Tobar]

Have you read the irrational forums?  Man, those guys are really upset.  (Or at least were... I haven't been over there in months.)  I go back to my lottery analogy... it's simultaneously triumphant and extremely disappointing.

I thought of one possible something what the scenario might be reminding me of... Xbox 360 <-> Xbox One.

CP3S said:

xhonzi said:

CP3S said:

Not to dis on Atlas Shrugged, it is just kind of a long tedious read, and it really isn't that great.

To offer a counter point- I really liked Atlas Shrugged. C3PX, I would think, is the target audience, so I'm surprised he didn't care for it...  It is long and it takes a while to get going... but I think it makes a pretty compelling argument.  And so much of what was ridiculed as "preposterous" in the book seems to be coming true around us.  Especially the past several years.

That is part of why I didn't care for it. I feel like something intended to explain a philosophy should seek to simplify it, not make it a daunting exercise to get through 

Good point.  However there are some philosophies that must be examined in application to make most sense (or lack thereof).  I'm sure Rand published lots of simplified Objectivists tracts that are now more or less forgotten... but her novels have stuck around because they are more compelling tracts than the tracts themselves were.

Similarly, the Bible manages to outlive any summarizations of its philosophy.  And many people would make the same argument that it's too long, and too obtuse to be effective at clearlyc conveying its themes.  I would be hard pressed to disagree with those people... 

CP3S said:

Has anyone else seen this theory about the Songbird?

xhonzi:
That seems pretty weak.  But who is the 'song bird' of BS1?  Sander Cohen.

The Songbird of BS1 is obviously the Big Daddies.

I meant 'song bird' by name, not 'songbird' by function.

But if the Songbird = Big Daddies, then Handymen = X. 

Solve for X.

Bingowings said:

I believe he is recording some kind of music called hippityhoppity with an ensemble called TheBoostieBoys.

 And Slugoo... right?

They didn't break up Slugoo and the Boost, right?

RIGHT?!?!

Johnny Ringo said:

GI Joe 2. What is up with the Rock? he is freaking huge. he is literally twice the man he used to be.

Joss Whedon should have put him in a Ruffalo wig and cast him as the Hulk. That said, I feel like his acting has improved a great deal over the years.

mindless fun. 2 balls.

Tobar said:

I was pretty disappointed by Bioshock Infinite. The new story DLC has me excited though.

It reminds me of something... where they introduce a new spin on a beloved favourite... it's not well received, and they instantly return to the old formula.  Can't put my finger on it.

As I may have posted earlier, I RedBoxed BS:I (360) when it first came out.  I played it quickly over several days and paid $6 to beat it when it was brand new.  My plan was to pick it up later when it was cheap and had some new content.  Long story short- I paid $10 for it on Steam (bought a key on CAG)  and then picked up the Season Pass on greenmangaming with a code for $16.  I'm intrigued by the Burial at Sea content- enough to drop $26 on a game I've pretty much already played.  But now I can replay it in 3D on my pc... or maybe even Oculus Rift when that comes out.

I'm replaying it on 1999 mode.

/life story

Has anyone else seen this theory about the Songbird?

 That seems pretty weak.  But who is the 'song bird' of BS1?  Sander Cohen.

I think it's pretty awesome in a game like BioShock (or a TV series like Lost) that once you suggest some level of conspiracy, that the fan base will search high and low and find all sorts of unexplainable coincidences.  Reminds me of that Back to the Future- Doc Brown is Zeus youtube video. 

CP3S said:

The best time to read Atlas Shrugged is pretty much never. You're not going to get more out of the game by having read Atlas Shrugged or any of Ayn Rand's other books first. Yeah, it is a dystopian using a failed objectivist society as the backdrop, which is completely awesome, but as long as you have some grasp on the concepts of objectivism you're not going to miss out on that angle of the story.

Not to dis on Atlas Shrugged, it is just kind of a long tedious read, and it really isn't that great.

I responded in the Bioshock thread.

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/BioShock-1-2-and-Infinite-and-SPOILERS/post/656205/#TopicPost656205

CP3S said:

The best time to read Atlas Shrugged is pretty much never. You're not going to get more out of the game by having read Atlas Shrugged or any of Ayn Rand's other books first. Yeah, it is a dystopian using a failed objectivist society as the backdrop, which is completely awesome, but as long as you have some grasp on the concepts of objectivism you're not going to miss out on that angle of the story.

Not to dis on Atlas Shrugged, it is just kind of a long tedious read, and it really isn't that great.

To offer a counter point- I really liked Atlas Shrugged. C3PX, I would think, is the target audience, so I'm surprised he didn't care for it...  It is long and it takes a while to get going... but I think it makes a pretty compelling argument.  And so much of what was ridiculed as "preposterous" in the book seems to be coming true around us.  Especially the past several years.

I think it makes a better case for Objectivism than Fountainhead. 

I think familiarity with Ayn Rand will enhance one's enjoyment of Bioshock 1 & 2.  When I played BS1, it had been over 10 years since I had first/last read Atlas Shrugged.  Playing the game convinced me to give it another read, which I'm glad I did.  As an adult, I found I enjoyed it much more than I did when I was 13 or so.

In summary, you can do it either way.  I think playing the game first is a fine approach.

Johnny Ringo said:

TV's Frink said:

Johnny Ringo said:

sent from my xhonzi 8 Pro.

Shut up and take my money!

okay...What really happened in his kitchen? ;)

 He peeled vegetables.  And ate bacon.

Hmmm... PGCEdit maybe...

I'm trying to reverse engineer some Scene It! game DVDs.  They use "optreve technology to skip from one title/chapter with a video clip, to another with a question, and then to a third title/chapter with the answer.  There are multiple questions for one video clip, which is where the trick is.

I think decoding the DVD programming to find all of the links is impossible.  If it's not, that would be really cool.

What I was hoping to do- play the DVD is "party mode" on my laptop in a program that could log what each action was.  I checked to see if VLC did this... but didn't find anything.

Does anyone know of a DVD playing program that has a verbose log enough that I can see what title/chapter played when?

The alternative is pen & paper.  ;)

http://thecoplbookclub.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/the-culmination/

All that needs to be said.

Can this be called "Ghostbustin'"?

Please?

Courtship of Princess Leia is sort of a must because it is fantastically aweful.  Not quite The Room but that's the general idea.

CP3S said:

I stood up and washed my hands really well, all the while thinking to myself, "Well, that's one for Xhonzi's minor miracles thread".

I knew you'd understand where I was coming from.

I found Skyfall to be an uncomfortable mix of classic Bond over-the-topness, and Bourneish/Nolanish 'realism'. 

Either Bond is superman, or he gets old and has to retire.  Can't have it both ways.

If you head into a gun fight with 30 year old intel on where the guns are-  don't be surprised if someone moved them while you were out.

Fix that (if you can) and maybe I will have some use for Skyfall.  As it is now, it's too silly to be serious and too serious to be fun. 

(And maybe add a post credits scene of Kevin from Home Alone waking up and it was all a dream.  If you keep the Home Alone action at the end, that is... which it sounds like you're not.)

Hal 9000 said:

 I would not dream of approaching an abridged copy of Lord of the Rings, but this is Star Wars and there is a lot to get through.

When Heir to the Empire came out, I was completely taken by it.  I read it several times and bought the 3 hour audiobook and listened to it several more times.  At the time, I didn't notice much difference between the text and its audible abridgement.

I kept up with SW EU for several years, and started to realize a lot of it was drek around the Black Fleet Crisis series or thereabouts.  I wanted more Zahn, so I bought the Thrawn Duology when it came out, but never read them.

Years ago I wanted to revisit Zahn's HTTE trilogy, so I dug up the tapes and listened to them.  They were terrible.  It made me wonder if the books weren't as good as I remembered them or if the abridgement was poor.

It was the abridgment.  I re-read the books and found them delightful- even better than I had remembered.  Better than I had been able to appreciate in 1991. 

You can get the unabridged audio of HTTE anywhere fine books are sold or loaned... Dark Force Rising and The Last Command are trickier- but Audible sells them. 

tl;dr- Beware the abridgement.  Disappointment and underwhelment are its allies. 

Jaitea said:

...right at the end of ROTJ .....Vader says his big "No,ooooooooooooooo!" J

 No.

You wants the hose again?

valinkrai said:

Still have a unfinished ... Bioshock ... sitting around waiting for me to play.

 IGNORED.

You rang?

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

It is possible in the future that some nut might it into his head to do one of these shootings in an effort to get gun control legislation passed?  It is.   But was that the motivation for the people that did the shootings I mentioned?  I haven't heard that it was. 

Honestly, I don't suppose any of these shooters were anti-gun-nuts.  I believe there is something wrong with them... but not that.

However, I am willing to suppose that someone set them up that was.  Someone that let the proverbial lion run wild in the proverbial village because it met their own agenda.

set them up?  how?    prove this. 

Use your imagination.  I'm not sure what you want me to prove...  That it's possible?  That's all I'm claiming here.  We've already both agreed that it's possible.

Perhaps my usage of the word 'suppose' was too strong.  Please replace with 'entertain the idea'.

xhonzi said:

And, barring that, I firmly believe that anti-gun-nuts decided it was the perfect opportunity to push legislation... one that they have been praying for.

I suppose it is possible that the some anti-gun people are happy about the shootings, in that it gives them the opportunity to get gun control legislation passed.   

Then we are in agreement. 

But I believe the overwhelming majority of anti-gun are upset about the shootings as I am and just want to get gun control legislation passed in order to save lives. 

Then we are in agreement.

On the other hand I could argue that maybe gun nuts set up the guys that did the bombings in order show that nuts will still kill people ever if they do not have guns. 

I think that's way sillier than anything I said.  For the record.

xhonzi said:

If the intended reaction is that people get mad (or scared, or whatever), and pass all sorts of new freedom-limiting laws (or whatever)... then that's the reaction we must not give.  If we do, then we have been manipulated to give these sickos just what they want.

whether or not gun control legislation is a good idea has nothing to do with what these sickos what.  

See my comments in reply to Frink- about giving in to temper tantrums.

Lets say for the sake of argument that gun control could save lives and prevent massacres, are you telling me we shouldn't pass it merely because it is what the sickos want?   

Don't negotiate with terrorists.  Don't let people manipulate your actions. 

TV's Frink said:

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

...I think more are saying, "What if this isn't what it appears to be?  If it's not, then it's probably someone trying to manipulte my actions.  What reaction are they looking for?  That's the one I don't want to give."

not really sure what any of that has to do with the Boston bombing or conspiracy theories of it and other things like it.  

If the intended reaction is that people get mad (or scared, or whatever), and pass all sorts of new freedom-limiting laws (or whatever)... then that's the reaction we must not give.  If we do, then we have been manipulated to give these sickos just what they want.

So, we should not pass stricter anti-gun legislation on the small chance that someone who wants stricter anti-gun legislation is the one who let these lions loose in our village?

That's quite a stretch.

 Not quite.  I am saying:

There is a chance the events were designed to elicit an emotion to pass otherwise unfavourable laws.

I am not saying:

Due to this chance, regardless how small, we must be firm in not passing these laws.

I am saying:

It's worth looking into to see what the intended purpose was.  It's worth considering that it's not what it first appears to be.  People are clever.

If the intended manipulation is that we get scared:

   Let's not do that.

If the intended manipulation is that we withdraw troops:

   Let's not do that.

If the intended manipulation is that we change gun laws:

   Let's not do that.

If the intended manipulation is that we become suspicious of all Arab/Muslim people:

   Let's not do that.

If the intended manipulation is that we [insert anything else here]:

   Let's not do that.

We're both parents, Frink.  If one of our kids is semi-seriously hurt (bike fall or something) she will cry and we will console and medicate as neccessary.  Her reaction (pain, anguish, etc.) is what it appears to be on the surface.  If this same child doesn't get the fork that she wants at dinner time, her reaction may be very much the same... except that it's an action designed to manipulate her parents (or others) into getting what she wants, not what she needs.  I think you like me understand that to give in to a temper tantrum is to reward and encourage that kind of thing in the future... but to be a doting father when one of our kids is hurt comes very naturally.

About 5% of the time that my younger kids cry it's because they really need me.  The rest of the time they are trying to get what they want through manipulative actions, and I, like the great President Harrison Ford, refuse to negotiate with terrorists.