• 80 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

Back in the day, a TNT was 2 hours, maybe 2 1/2. Not, they barely get over 90 minutes. I can't remember exactly when this started, maybe a year ago. Does it bother anyone else? Does anyone know the reason behind this change?

#2 Posted by FLStyle (4536 posts) -

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

#3 Edited by EuanDewar (4690 posts) -

The Underground Railroad

#4 Posted by mordukai (7127 posts) -

@FLStyle said:

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

Which one? The first one was good too.

#5 Posted by Milkman (16484 posts) -

I don't know. Two hours of Cards Against Humanity would have been a little much, though. The hour and 20 minutes that we got was pretty exhausting. I'm glad it ended when it did. 

#6 Posted by UitDeToekomst (699 posts) -

Fortune Street probably burned them out. I love that TNT, though.

#7 Posted by JackSukeru (5898 posts) -

I would have watched an extra half hour of Cards Against Humanity but otherwise I'm fine with them being shorter. A lot of games don't stay interesting for a full 2 hours.

#8 Posted by Nonused (210 posts) -

@UitDeToekomst: God. That was the best.

#9 Posted by Lyfeforce (350 posts) -

I'm okay with a shorter time as long as the laughs keep coming. Not all games have Trucks and horrible things to say to keep the magic going.

#10 Posted by fox01313 (5061 posts) -

Might have been that they've been either getting things set up or having tons of people gone so they might not have had the free time or the available people for a longer one. That or it's a conspiracy.

#11 Posted by Sarumarine (2160 posts) -

I'm not so much about the length of TNTs. I think quality over quantity wins out most of the time. I'd be fine with a half-hour feature as long as it was still entertaining.

Besides, I think it's in everyone's best interest for measured doses of Cards Against Humanity. You don't wanna OD on premo stuff like that.

#12 Posted by Boboblaw (269 posts) -
@FLStyle said:

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

I don't think yesterdays CAH TNT was that great. I thought the CAH/Star Trek Online tnt was better.
#13 Posted by FLStyle (4536 posts) -

@mordukai said:

@FLStyle said:

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

Which one? The first one was good too.

@Boboblaw said:

@FLStyle said:

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

I don't think yesterdays CAH TNT was that great. I thought the CAH/Star Trek Online tnt was better.

Am I allowed to say both?

#14 Posted by Mijati (877 posts) -

@Boboblaw said:

@FLStyle said:

Meh, it is what it is. Didn't change the fact that CAH TNT was the best in a long time.

I don't think yesterdays CAH TNT was that great. I thought the CAH/Star Trek Online tnt was better.

I agree, if anything yesterday's episode was too long.

#15 Posted by OldGuy (1493 posts) -
@ThePickle said:

Back in the day, a TNT was 2 hours, maybe 2 1/2. Not, they barely get over 90 minutes. I can't remember exactly when this started, maybe a year ago. Does it bother anyone else? Does anyone know the reason behind this change?

Because they hate you. You personally. That's why. Sorry.
#16 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

#17 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@UitDeToekomst said:

Fortune Street probably burned them out. I love that TNT, though.

It was happening before that.

@OldGuy said:

@ThePickle said:

Back in the day, a TNT was 2 hours, maybe 2 1/2. Not, they barely get over 90 minutes. I can't remember exactly when this started, maybe a year ago. Does it bother anyone else? Does anyone know the reason behind this change?

Because they hate you. You personally. That's why. Sorry.

How's it feel being the least funny person in the thread?

#18 Posted by MrKlorox (11198 posts) -
@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

This seems like it was the catalyst for shortening TNTs. I'm all for a full 2 hour TNT as long as it isn't horribly boring like when they do shooters that are not Battlefield.
#19 Posted by Phatmac (5720 posts) -

Guess they're sick of playing games for that long all the time? I'm alright with it. TNT's are still good most of the time.

#20 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

But it's not like they're condensing more laughs into 90 minutes. It's the same basic show except it cuts of 30-40 minutes before it usually did.

#21 Posted by Zidd (1836 posts) -

They probably have to share that space with other people and so its gotta be scheduled in advance.

#22 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -

@MrKlorox said:

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

This seems like it was the catalyst for shortening TNTs. I'm all for a full 2 hour TNT as long as it isn't horribly boring like when they do shooters that are not Battlefield.

I think it was that, and Ryan had to take a dump half the time.

#23 Posted by BraveToaster (12590 posts) -

You should hit up one of the staff members' Formspring/Twitter accounts or send them an email to be read during the Bombcast.

#24 Posted by Sergotron (475 posts) -

Hope

#25 Posted by DoctorWelch (2774 posts) -

This has only really been true recently and I think it will get better when more multiplayer games start coming out.

#26 Posted by OldGuy (1493 posts) -
@ThePickle said:

@OldGuy said:
@ThePickle said:

Back in the day, a TNT was 2 hours, maybe 2 1/2. Not, they barely get over 90 minutes. I can't remember exactly when this started, maybe a year ago. Does it bother anyone else? Does anyone know the reason behind this change?

Because they hate you. You personally. That's why. Sorry.

How's it feel being the least funny person in the thread?

I'm good with it.
#27 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

But it's not like they're condensing more laughs into 90 minutes. It's the same basic show except it cuts of 30-40 minutes before it usually did.

but's its more watchable for the duration of the show. A lot of multiplayer games are quite boring to watch for a long period of time. The shorter time makes it more bearable. Clearly that doesn't apply for every TNT but in general it works out this way. And then when they do something like fortune Street it's a real treat.

#28 Posted by Solh0und (1753 posts) -

@UitDeToekomst said:

Fortune Street probably burned them out. I love that TNT, though.

I totally need to watch that one....

#29 Posted by ShaggE (6295 posts) -

90 is a good average, but some games beg for more, and 2 or more hours is a treat in those cases.

I do think CAH needs more than 90 minutes, though. They were just getting warmed up by the half-way point.

#30 Posted by SmilingPig (1337 posts) -

It was a pole last June, the choices where 2 sec, 90 mins, never and Hat.

90 min won by a narrow margin over Hat.

#31 Posted by BBQBram (2199 posts) -

Shit I barely ever watch TNT. It's a lot of fun but the shooter ones can get boring. Mostly I just forget it's there, which must be weird because it's really the main attraction besides the Bombcast.

#32 Posted by S0ndor (2715 posts) -

I feel a petition coming on

#33 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@devilzrule27 said:

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

But it's not like they're condensing more laughs into 90 minutes. It's the same basic show except it cuts of 30-40 minutes before it usually did.

but's its more watchable for the duration of the show. A lot of multiplayer games are quite boring to watch for a long period of time. The shorter time makes it more bearable. Clearly that doesn't apply for every TNT but in general it works out this way. And then when they do something like fortune Street it's a real treat.

But you could just stop watching if it got boring.

#34 Posted by emem (1960 posts) -

I think it's alright that way...a lot of times whoever played almost fell asleep in the last 30 minutes of a TNT and this way they can stop or play for a little longer, if that's what they decide to do. The CAH TNT yesterday kinda left me wanting more, but isn't that a good thing, though? 
 
After the last "Cards" TNT I didn't really want to see another one (it wasn't that funny, tbh), but this one... especially the "baby part" was sick in so many ways... I still have to shake my head and somehow can't shake the grin, I wonder what that's saying about me, oh oh oh. 
 
Aaaanyways, I don't have a problem with it.

#35 Posted by FreakAche (2948 posts) -

It's so you don't have to miss CBS's exquisite Thursday night comedy line-up.

#36 Posted by crusader8463 (14411 posts) -

Ya, I wish they went back to their longer format. Though my understanding is that they can no longer just go do stupid shit when they want any more and need to book time in the green screen room and the podcast chambers so they are now limited to a shorter time. Hope I'm wrong, because that really sucks that they have to cut stuff down. Would have loved to see that Humanity TNT go longer. It seemed like it only started to pick up near the end.

#37 Edited by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@Sergotron said:

Hope

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

But it's not like they're condensing more laughs into 90 minutes. It's the same basic show except it cuts of 30-40 minutes before it usually did.

but's its more watchable for the duration of the show. A lot of multiplayer games are quite boring to watch for a long period of time. The shorter time makes it more bearable. Clearly that doesn't apply for every TNT but in general it works out this way. And then when they do something like fortune Street it's a real treat.

But you could just stop watching if it got boring.

So you're saying that they should just drag things out and use up their time even if the content doesn't warrant it? is there something about needing the videos to be 2hrs+ for you? is it the only way you can get off anymore?

They go as long as the guys think they should. You've already said that you think this was happening before the exceedingly long fortune street tnt so it's quite clear that they just go until a natural consensus by them to end it. Also they have to book the green screen as far as I'm aware.

#38 Posted by Harkat (1100 posts) -

The retro games stream lasted a good 3 hours. As long as we get one of those every once in a while, I'm good with a 90 minute TNT.

#39 Posted by JacDG (2113 posts) -

As long as they actually play the games they want to, not the ones they feel forced to do (Like, new releases) I'm all for it being shorter, it's all about entertainment, which has been most prevalent with games like Cards against Humanity, Banjo Kazooie, Fortune Street and Trackmania 2 was pretty great as well.

#40 Edited by JoeyRavn (4946 posts) -

@EuanDewar said:

The Underground Railroad

Dude. Really.

#41 Posted by PulledaBrad (612 posts) -

It's not the shorter time, it's the fact that they are moving away from gaming with the community which is the real bummer.

#42 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@Sergotron said:

Hope

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

@ThePickle said:

@devilzrule27 said:

When they were playing shooters for every TNT I would never watch the full 2 hours cause it would get stale and boring. Shorter play time is for the best.

But it's not like they're condensing more laughs into 90 minutes. It's the same basic show except it cuts of 30-40 minutes before it usually did.

but's its more watchable for the duration of the show. A lot of multiplayer games are quite boring to watch for a long period of time. The shorter time makes it more bearable. Clearly that doesn't apply for every TNT but in general it works out this way. And then when they do something like fortune Street it's a real treat.

But you could just stop watching if it got boring.

So you're saying that they should just drag things out and use up their time even if the content doesn't warrant it? is there something about needing the videos to be 2hrs+ for you? is it the only way you can get off anymore?

They go as long as the guys think they should. You've already said that you think this was happening before the exceedingly long fortune street tnt so it's quite clear that they just go until a natural consensus by them to end it. Also they have to book the green screen as far as I'm aware.

They were doing 2 hour videos that were plenty entertaining and then they just stopped. If you're saying the TNTs get boring after awhile, then stop watching. Shortening it to 90 minutes doesn't suddenly make it more entertaining. And use up their time? Really? It's their fucking job.

Exceeding long Fortune Street TNT? That is easily the best TNT of all time. Many people will agree with this.

#43 Posted by RecSpec (3754 posts) -

I loved how I tuned out from the Fortune Street TNT to go run some errands, come back later, and it was STILL going. 
 
First TNT I actually saw the end of.

#44 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@ThePickle: You seem to be working under the assumption that the word 'exceedingly' is a negative, Mr. Kipling's cakes must be fucked if this is the case. Their job is to produce good content and keep hits coming in, filling an extra half an hour with matt bodega playing space marine whilst Dave kinda twiddles his thumbs isn't the job description.

Conversely if shortening it doesn't suddenly make it more entertaining why does lengthening it have such an effect that you feel so strongly about this? The TNT's will be as long as the crew think they should be, there's no magical number of hours, minutes and seconds that will suddenly add laughs and entertainment.

#45 Posted by Animasta (14637 posts) -

if they had gone longer brad would have just won again so why bother?

#46 Posted by TheHBK (5458 posts) -

It is just that you need to take a look at the games they are playing. When we start hitting games that have deeper multiplayer components, more game types, maps, stuff the guys can lose themselves in, then you get the longer ones.

#47 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@ThePickle: You seem to be working under the assumption that the word 'exceedingly' is a negative, Mr. Kipling's cakes must be fucked if this is the case. Their job is to produce good content and keep hits coming in, filling an extra half an hour with matt bodega playing space marine whilst Dave kinda twiddles his thumbs isn't the job description.

Conversely if shortening it doesn't suddenly make it more entertaining why does lengthening it have such an effect that you feel so strongly about this? The TNT's will be as long as the crew think they should be, there's no magical number of hours, minutes and seconds that will suddenly add laughs and entertainment.

Exceedingly has negative connotations when used all by itself. "Exceedingly long" does not sound like a compliment.

TNTs haven't gotten any better from shortening them so why do it? Why did they do it in the first place? That was my original question. If the Bombcast got shortened to 90 minutes, many people would have this same reaction. I'm more confused than anything else, because it's clear shortening them does not increase their quality. In fact, it may deduct from the quality because very few TNTs have been entertaining lately. When they do do 2 hours (Iron Brigade) it becomes better. If people don't want to watch 2 hours it's fine, but don't take it away for those who do.

And it's got nothing to do with what the staff feels that day. They said explicitly in the latest TNT that the new norm is 90 minutes.

#48 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@ThePickle: ex·ceed·ing·ly (k-sdng-l)adv.To an advanced or unusual degree; extremely.

there is no negative connotation, it is an adverb used in this case to show the unusual part of the length (length being indicated by the word 'long' since you seem to be having trouble with this). Your argument about this is all extremely contradictory, first saying length makes no difference in quality (subjective) whilst simultaneously saying that length does make a difference (once again, subjective)

#49 Posted by ThePickle (4153 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@ThePickle: ex·ceed·ing·ly (k-sdng-l)adv.To an advanced or unusual degree; extremely.

there is no negative connotation, it is an adverb used in this case to show the unusual part of the length (length being indicated by the word 'long' since you seem to be having trouble with this). Your argument about this is all extremely contradictory, first saying length makes no difference in quality (subjective) whilst simultaneously saying that length does make a difference (once again, subjective)

It's not contradictory: shortening them does not make them better. 2 hours TNTs are usually better than the 90 minutes ones. Those do not contradict each other. Do I need to include a copy and paste from dictionary.com to show you how smart I am or will you take my word for it? And don't trot out the "subjective" bullshit on a site based on criticism and expressing opinion.

#50 Posted by ShadowConqueror (3048 posts) -

CBS, man. CBS.