xhonzi

IGNORE this thread based on the use of non-words in the title.

TV's Frink said:

Oh, yeah, I'm so changing my edit's name to "The Ridonkulous Menace."

 Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

<WRONG PICTURE>

Buwahahahahahaha!

My pet peeve is that "ridonkulous" and "ginormous" seem to have replaced "ridiculous" and "gigantic/enormous" almost completely.

CP3S said:

Something else.

 

:D

 TELL ME!!!! I NEEED TO KNOW!

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLTTTTTTTTTTTTIIIIIIIIIIIMMMMMMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTEEEEEEEEEEEE PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRR!

Post 4 of this thread is pretty terrible.

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2011/03/10_crappiest_parts_of_the_star_wars_jedi_prince_se.php?utm_source=scribol&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=scribol

This takes me back.  I still have these books.  They were terrible when they were new- I can't imagine how they'd hold up now.

Some cool covers though.

My friend has the tape.  Haven't talked to him about it in a couple of weeks.  I'll see him this weekend and see how it's going.

DuracellEnergizer said:

captainsolo said:

The problem with EU books is once you get one you don't want to stop.

And the problem becomes a nightmare when you start forcing yourself to read as much of the EU material as possible just to create a definitive personal canon.

 And the nightmare becomes a night terror when you realize that, though you liked the first stuff you read, everything you're currently reading sucks.  Now you have to decide how far back to wind the odometer so that you can establish your 'personal canon' with only stuff that you "liked" or that was "at least mostly good".

The same thing happened to X-Men comics in the 90s.

CP3S said:

Wait... I actually kind of like what you did there...

The 'making you link to another page to see it'? The 'not posting it twice in two different threads'? Or something else?

I enjoy receiving praise, but I like to know what it's for.

Just finished Force Unleashed 2.  Here are my thoughts:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-The-Force-Unleashed/post/513782/#TopicPost513782

I spent 5 hours and played through Force Unleashed II on hard.  Wow, that was a short game.  Not only short, but short.  The original game had, by my account, 6 or 7 locations- this one has 3.  Perhaps a little more time is spent at each location- but I don't think so. 

Regardless of what you think of the story of the first game, this story is really quite weak. 

There isn't really any innovation in gameplay- just a few new moves added to the set.  QTE events are much simpler... which is fine other than it means you're just watching a QTE without having to push any buttons.  I'd rather still have to do something rather than just watch.

The enemies are repeats from the first game, with a few new (3 or 4) ones for good measure. 

The boss battles are all new, and the "I'm falling and using my force powers" segment is used to good effect three times in the game. 

There's a much stronger "Prequel" setting to this game (2 of the 3 settings are prequel related), which was a turnoff for me.  Though both of those settings really are beautiful and Cato Nemoidia was really well done.

Probably most offensive, they really trashed the "character leveling/progression" bit.  Instead of working towards a new level for your character where you'll get some tokens to develope several different kind of abilities, debuffs, and characteristics- you just get points for everything you do and you can use the points to level up 6 different characteristics.  I appreciate that they didn't take the common sequel route- "Look at all of those upgrades you got in the first game!  You ROCK!  Oops... nevermind- looks like you lost them and you'll have to start over.  Sorry 'bout that. :(" but they even had the perfect set-up since you don't play "the same character" from the first game anyhow.

The Holocrons aren't really hidden (for the most part) and unlock other upgrades- like health, force 'mana', and new costume and lightsabre parts.

HOWEVER-

Despite all of that, I quite enjoyed it.  You might be wondering how, based on the above.  Yeah, me too.  I'm playing through it again, on "Unleashed" difficulty.  In the first game, playing on the hardest difficulty meant starting over without any of your upgrades and having to work twice as hard to get each one.  This time, it's new game plus and it might be a tinge easier than hard was, since you are mostly upgraded when you start "unleashed".

Had this been a $20 expansion to the first game, I think people would have been over the moon with it.  Since it was a full $60 sequel (or at least, was sold as such) I still can't help but be disappointed by it.  But since I only paid $15 for it at Blockbuster... I am still mostly happy with it.

And speaking of expansions , the Endor DLC for this game (I paid 80 MS points for it and I think that's still the price) is the best part of the game.  Continuing on (I think) from the end of the DLC from the first game, you have already defeated Obi-Wan on Tatooine and Luke on Hoth and now you have tracked the flailing Rebellion to Endor.  You're dropped off near the Rebel's stolen Shuttle and make your way through the Ewok village and chase the rebels to the shield generator.  There you have to face down Han and Chewie and then chase after the princess who is setting charges. 

Something about this level really worked for me and I think it might have been playing the bad guy again.  (Or it was the OT setting)  In this level, you are the Darth Vader that never was.  You are young, you are fast, you are full of fire and destruction.  You are the sole representation of the Empire on Endor and the rebels about crap their pants when they hear you are coming.  And rightfully so, since you wipe them out.   All of them.

I guess this is maybe what Maul was supposed to be?  He came across as too much of a cartoon for me to ever really consider him to be a true threat.  Sure, he fought off 2 Jedi at once.  Did he ever trash an entire legion of his enemies?  Maybe he did in a book somewhere.  It's too bad.  The Prequels should have had someone like this in them. 

Bump?

Did you ever get what you needed, Spence?  I'm not offering anything... just asking.

Anchorhead said:

I'm an EU guy, so I know there is more and much better Star Wars to be told.  Lucas is just not the one capable of handling it.

 Whoah, whoah, whoah... let's not get carried away.

doubleofive said:

xhonzi said:

I used to be a PC gamer.  I used to be a hardcore PC gamer.  Back when I was a 3D modeler for commericals, my home PC was bleeding edge.  It cost thousands of dollars a year, but it was always new. 

I'm sorry, what?

Is that surprise I'm reading, or did I say something dumb?

I probably haven't mentioned that before.  It was my career in the mid 90s.  It was going to be my career for life until the lasers took over while I was on sabbattical and I ended up in my current line of work instead.

It's wasn't anything sexy.  Mosltly laundry detergent boxes.  Laundry detergent bottles had so many more polygons... but those only came around every once in a while.

CP3S said:

$1,000 for a "bleeding-edge" computer vs. a couple of hundred for a gaming console? Hmmm?

I really just have a hard time seeing PC gaming being definitively "where it's at".

No matter how good the computer, sooner or later you're bound to hit some snag that makes you have to go through some kind of a hassle in order to get a certain game to work. It is kind of nice that PC games are usually about ten bucks cheaper than console games these days, but then again you can't resell, trade, or give away most modern games thanks to increasingly strict DRM. The vast majority of my 360 games cost me less than $20 dollars, most commonly I pay in the $8 to $12 dollar range. I also like that I don't have to wait for games to install and that I never have to worry about compatibility, performance, or anything else that might hinder my experience of the game (except in the case of freaking Assassin's Creed II).

I am a big FPS fan and that is mostly what I play, I've never had any complaints with a controller and now the thought of going back to a mouse and wasd keyboard setup is very unappealing. This is really just a matter of personal preference. I would have agreed with you back in the N64 days though, it was really hard to be accurate in games like Goldeneye with the 64's controller. But we've come a long way since then.

I've seen the games I play on my 360 played on high end PCs, and I can't say I feel like I am missing out on that much. If the difference were night and day and I felt really blown away by immensely better frame rates and graphics, then I might break down and agree with you; but really, I just don't see this super duper advantage of PC gaming... Except when it comes to modding, or in the cases like that of Left 4 Dead, free DLC. Modding isn't something I have time for/the slightest interest in (when I was a kid and had a lot of time on my hands I loved it! I even discovered modding on my own by dinking around in my games install folders long before I had the internet and discovered it had a name and thousands of other people did it as well), and while paying five dollars a piece for DLC that is free to PC users is very annoying, it's not really worth getting worked up enough about to run out and buy a $1000 dollar computer for.

For a few years I did all my gaming on the PC and was a pretty big advocate of PC gaming. Back in the mid nineties to the end of the last generation, the console counter parts of PC games didn't even compare in the slightest. The PC version was always going to be better beyond comparison to its PS2 or Xbox counter part, even when my computer got so outdated I had to turn my graphics down all the way, it still looked better than on the PS2. The thing is, that simply isn't true anymore. You really have to have a sharp eye and some decent side by side comparison shots to pick out the differences between the console versions and the PC version of games like Portal 2 or Fallout: New Vegas.

To me, for the difference, I'd rather just have the far more accessible and far more affordable console hooked up to my big screen TV, where I can play it on the comfort of my couch (incidentally TV, couch, and 360 collectively all cost me less than $1,000) rather than play on an expensive machine sitting at a desk on a ridiculously large and expensive monitor that is still smaller than my TV. And as more of a social gamer than anything else, I find I have far more friends playing games like COD or L4D on a 360 than I do on a computer.

Consoles just make more sense for me in every way. The personal advantages of consoles to me are great, and the disadvantages small. Obviously that isn't true for everyone, but I think it is for a lot of us who have many other obligations and only a few hours of (video game) playtime a week.

I agree with this 100%.

I used to be a PC gamer.  I used to be a hardcore PC gamer.  Back when I was a 3D modeler for commericals, my home PC was bleeding edge.  It cost thousands of dollars a year, but it was always new. 

A console that I spent $300 on 6 years ago (plus ~$100-$150 in controllers and other other accessories over the years) was the best computing purchase of my life.

Tyrphanax- What makes you call them overpriced?  As far as I can tell, they are a steal for what they are.  You're getting the hardware below cost- they subsidize the hardware costs to spur software sales.

And let me add a little fuel to this fight:

I think there are about 1000 times as many PC -> Console gamers as there are Console -> PC gamers.  Therefore: the argument is usually between people that have only played PC, and those that used to play a lot of PC but now play only console.  One group is prepared to argue the pros and cons.  The others- not so much.  Most PC guys that complain about the controller have never logged enough hours to get above the learning curve.

RedFive said:

I'm down to join Xhonzi in a fight against all non-Bioshock players

Give 'em the bees, RedFive!

No... I just saw that someone that had made their own.  I'm not sure how they made them.

CP3S said:

Be curious to know if the ones at your Toys R Us are in as bad of shape as the ones at mine. Three good ones, six broken ones, and one missing from the box entirely is a pretty high failure rate.

 Not as far as I could tell.  I didn't scrutinize the one I bought, which was in good shape.  I didn't look closely at any of the others.

doubleofive said:

Latest rumor is Windows 8 will play Xbox 360 games. I am doubtful, but that could prove interesting.

That is interesting, though I don't think I'd really bite on it.  I don't have a modern gaming capable PC anymore (I can't afford to keep one up to spec).  Even though my Xbox is about to be 6 years old, my PC couldn't even come close to keeping up with it.  Though it would be a nice feature, all the same.

I sort of harbour this conspiracy theory that MS entered the console space so that they could kill it and everything would go pack to PCs.  Consoles are much more PC like than they used to be and PCs are much more console like than they used to be as well.  Almost makes you wonder if there will be a continued market for a "gaming console" in the near future.  Since my phone is also more console like and more PC like than my ol' black and decker used to be too. 

Also, all of this talk about a "unified console" that MS, Sony, Nintendo, etc. could all develop for and is interesting... especially since it sounds a lot like a PC.

The Nintendo DS has sort of adopted the PC model- there have been annual hardware updates (revisions, not "generations" with better features, some of which new games require and some of the newest models don't play all of the games the first models did (specifically GBA games and the Guitar Hero game). 

CP3S said:

xhonzi said:

CP3S said:

They had a ton of the Splicer mask + Little Sister + Omega sets. Took me a while to dig through and find one without a broken mask, but when I did I broke down and bought it.

Whaaaaat?  Are you telling me there is a "non-wrecked" variant to the splicer mask?

No. I am saying the wrecked splicer mask is either incredibly fragile or the local TRU employees in my area are extremely rough with the store's merchandise. They had about ten of the sets there, and all but three of the masks were broken into two or more pieces inside the box. After seeing that I treat mine like it is made of glass. 

Darn.  Well, at least I don't have to go back to TRU and swim through the boxes. 

I'm pretty tempted to fill the holes in on mine with bondo or something.  Maybe reform to the best of my ability the missing pieces. 

CP3S said:

They had a ton of the Splicer mask + Little Sister + Omega sets. Took me a while to dig through and find one without a broken mask, but when I did I broke down and bought it.

Whaaaaat?  Are you telling me there is a "non-wrecked" variant to the splicer mask?

George Lucas said: 

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

And it's not at all surprising that many people these days are reluctant to watch Star Wars.  The whole franchise and saga have gotten so silly that people assume the whole lot is a bunch of juvenile silliness.

Absolutely agree.  Star Wars is nowhere near as respected as a film series as it was 25 years ago.  And I'm not the least bit surprised. Hell, I'm an the original fan creator and I don't respect it.

adywan said:

rpvee said:

Ady, noble as it is for you to defend the films over there... seeing posts like that makes me question if it's worth it. *sigh*

You think that's bad? You haven't seen shaft_windbags comments:

Most defenders of the OOT don't even know anymore what they looked like. Sure, Jabba and the music-number could have been executed better but so do countless traditional "Toy'n'Rubber"-effects. But the "new scenes" are just the cherry on top and I'm sure nobody would want to miss any of the little tweaks and improvements the movies have now to offer!

I like it that there is ONE valid version and Lucas makes a clear decision how the movies should be presented. If there are multiple versions one only concentrates an the technical aspects of how the movies are made. To me the story is the most important thing.

Anakins Turn to the Dark Side is carefully prepared.

(On the Greedo shoots first argument) The scene is edited exactly the same. They have just cleared that insanely large smoke-cloud from the original release - so you can see that someone shoots AT ALL!

Star Wars is no showcase for actors. I would never expect an Oscar-nomination for acting for Star Wars. (Alec Guinness? Did he not know about that-idiot) That's not its strength - it's storytelling. And in that respect I have the highest of standards. Read some of the books by Joseph Campbell, C.G. Jung or Christopher Vogler and you will undoubtedly see the genius behind the saga.

The six movies are really alike. So either it's your cup of tea or it isn't. It's like your the mother of twins and you hate one child and love the other. It's just not fair and irrational.

And people who dislike the PT don't know the first thing about Storytelling. That's just my opinion. For me the PT totally hit the spot. The acting was beatifully moving, especially in the love scenes and the final confrontation between Anakin and Padme.

I guarantee that when you hear the Star Wars-Fanfare for the first time in HD-Master Audio and see the razor-sharp Opening-Scroll float into perfect black space every little bickering about Dewbacks, Spirits and Yazeems is instantly forgotten and you just say: "WOW! Let's dive into that wonderful World that is the Star Wars Galaxy!"

How is it selfish when a director on each release enhances the movie-experience and invests so much energy and care to give his latest vision to the fans. He could have said "I don't care! Star Wars sells anyway. Why bother?" but he obviously wants audiences to experience the six-part-Saga as seamlessly as possible. I deeply appreciate it. And no, not every director includes every cut and version on the movies release. It's his choice because it's his vision and only the guy himself can judge wether the movies benefit from it or not. All we can do is buy it or don't. So easy!

As I heard the concept of "midichlorians" for the first time, I thought: "That's interesting, the creator of this world gives us new information on how it works. I wonder what part the midichlorians have to play in further episodes?" And I was not let down. The midichlorians play a major part in inheriting force-sensitivity, in finding the chosen one or in creating life...

The "so called fans" on the other hands just thought: "I don't get it - I hate it!" THATs the lack of respect I was talking about - and it's small-minded.

So true! After all, he DID release the incomplete versions on DVD and the bickering hasn't stopped for one minute. Why should Lucas give in to some conservatists if it doesn't change their view of Star Wars one bit. They still would hate it. Sad... His concern aren't the "fans" but the integrity of his work - as it should be. The Movies Lucas is most satisfied with are the only ones I would want to watch!

What shelldweller wants to know is why a visionary storyteller like Lucas who single-handedly revolutionized the way movies are made and seen draws that much hate on to him? Star Wars is a timeless story that has yet to find it's match in cinemas and people forget that it was not corporate decision, a book-adaption or a remake it came out of ONE MANS IMAGINATION! For petty little "fans" who seem to lack respect for Lucas' achievements there really is only one word: PATHETIC!

Why - don't - you - people - get - it - already!? We are not talking about different cuts of a movie (like with "Donnie Darko" or "the Exorcist" Director's Cuts). The Sequel-Trilogy are with each release the most recently updated Editions of THE SAME CUT! The Sequel Movies ARE to a degree of 99,5 % the same movies you saw in cinemas or on VHS in your childhoods - with just some minor Updates. You already got those movies you want and you will get them again on Blu-Ray - just not with muted colors, scratches and aged effects but an updated version of the movies. You should be grateful and not hateful for that!

The Saga should not just be a nod to a particular childhood memory of one generation - but rather a timeless experience that trancends generations!

Its almost impossible to believe that so many Star Wars fans believe all the bull and are almost like members of a brainwashed cult where their leader can do no wrong.

 I just threw up in my mouth a little.

And by "a little" I mean "a lot".