Also, why do some people over stress "a" when denoting a single entity? It feels like an annoying condescending quirk. Like when people over emphasize every syllable or word to help "stupid people" understand what they're saying, but it just makes them look like a fool and/or asshole, or that they're just not comfortable using certain English words. Like when people over emphasize "a" in the word "adult".
If I'm understanding what you're referring to, it's just another way of saying "one". Doesn't carry the same meaning as the same word without the emphasis, so it's more than just a choice of tone. Less dry than just saying "one", allows for a degree of playfulness or cheekiness.
Thinking about a way that I, myself, might use that in particular, imagine that you're wandering along and you spot me, who you now know well for the sake of this scenario, playing Netrunner against a friend."Aha!" You quip, "So you like card games?"
I might shoot you a mockingly judgmental glance and respond, "I like acard game."
See, because Netrunner is the only card game worth caring about because it's the best game of its kind ever made. But I hope you see the difference in nuance compared to the other ways I could have expressed that opinion. Dunno if this scenario covers what you were wondering about, but I didn't catch any instances of it in this video, so it'll have to do.
What! Since when is the brontosaurus a hoax!? Isn't that the one that was super popular a few decades ago, but then then the scientific community was like oh wait, we messed up, this is probably just a wonky apatosaurus let's strike the bronto from the history books (sorry Flintstones!), but then the scientific community kept looking at bones and were like, no, wait this must be a different species, welcome back brontosaurus!!
Really interesting how different games elicit different reactions from people... Rapid-firing arrows into an unaware tiger until it turns into a pincushion or putting a high caliber bullet through a friendly herbivore's head in Far Cry does nothing for anyone, nor either of the many variations of stabbing people in the face and/or neck from an intimate first person view. But wringing a cartoonishly low-poly rabbit's neck (the exact moment of which actually does happen off-screen)? Totally gruesome and unnecessary! Somehow.
@kevin_cogneto: OK Computer was released in the same year that Mmbop was. I was 8 years old in 1997. I can guarantee that in '97 I was listening to Mmbop and not OK Computer. It wasn't probably until middle or high school that I really started to explore actual music. My point is, the album is 20 years old. That's 20 years you have to listen to it. But not only has she not listened to it, she didn't know who recorded it. That's what surprised me. Even if I don't like a famous artist, I'm more than likely at minimum going to recognize their album's name.
I'm 33, and had to look up who recorded OK Computer. I never bothered to find out the names of Radiohead's albums, because after hearing them on the radio, I decided I wasn't interested in hearing any more of their music.
My friend is a film professor; he says the rule of thumb is that you can't expect students to have seen any movie made more than seven years ago, regardless of how famous or important it is.
I guess I just thought anyone who's really into a type of thing (alternative rock, platformers, film noir; whatever genre in whatever medium) would look up major artists/works in that genre when they realize they like it. Like "oh I like psychedelic rock, I should look up the best/most popular psych rock albums so I have more to listen to" that being said I wasn't so floored that Abby wasn't familiar with OK Computer, even if Radiohead are probably one of the biggest rock bands around.
I quite like some of Radiohead's stuff and I pretty much found out they existed about five years ago. I think I'd heard the name of a song or an album or two before then, but with no context, it didn't stick in my head. I am 30 years old. I don't know how this can be such a mystery to anyone.
I aggressively disliked this game from what little I played, and then the next several hours spent watching others play (even though they were having the time of their life), back when it came out. Watching this because I'm hoping for a new perspective to challenge my original opinion.
We've gone full circle, now comment sections about this game are filled with people who just HAVE to let everyone know how much they don't like the game.
That's the natural progression, really. As soon as a fanbase gets too loud there's always this kind of backlash. The original Nier fanbase was gettin there as well, thankfully not as aggresively as Undertale fans.
Also, Undertale is a good game. People should check it out on PS4/Vita if they haven't played it on PC.
Happens with something new, like, every year. Something blows up, people who are into it genuinely wish to share their excitement with the world but some do it in an unintentionally abrasive way, people who aren't into the thing get sick of hearing about it and some complain about it in an unnecessarily offensive way, which makes the people who like the thing but aren't actively advocating it feel like they have to defend their opinion, which can only be done by attempting to explain why the thing is good - which leads to more people being even more sick about hearing about it, some of which then going out of their way to bash fans of the thing in question, which leads to even more people getting on the defensive...
Hey. It's a good game. Glad more people will get the chance to play it (hopefully) on their terms. Also, excellent trailer with excellent references to actual in-game events that still make sense out of context.
Have people gone back to F-Zero? It's not as fast as wipeout unless you're playing wipeout on the lowest speed (which Alex is here) and are doing speed exploits in f-zero (snaking etc).
There's also proper physics so you really have to be in control of the vehicle in wipeout games.
TBH, comparing f-zero to wipeout is like comparing Doom II to Quake Champions. They have kind of a similar aesthetic and you shoot in both, that's about it.
Also the Vita and PSP launches were really good. Vita probably had the best lineup of launch games for systems in a long while, Dan doesn't know what he's talking about there.
F-Zero GX is fast. Fast to the point of being farcical. So fast that it can't have anything resembling actual physics, because it just doesn't work. I'm pretty sure it's the single fastest racing game ever made so far, it's in a league completely of its own. The older F-Zero games are more closely matched in speed with Wipeout, minus the intricate physics, but yeah, people should take it easy with the comparisons because basically Wipeout is more like a futuristic racing sim compared to F-Zero's pure arcade shenanigans. That's why I can't stand actually playing Wipeout and love the heck out of F-Zero!
Man, they really missed the point of the very mode they decided to make an entire game out of, didn't they...? Crash mode wasn't just fun because of the mechanics, but the setting was a huge part of the satisfaction. They understood enough to make them still be cars instead of boxes or something otherwise abstract, but the point was never that they're cars, but that it's traffic. That's what makes the destruction to satisfying, and that's the only thing carrying the entire mode! You gotta be able to imagine these ridiculous stunts happening for real somehow, with some real piece of road blocked off and filled with remote controlled cars or whatever, or the theme counts for nothing.
And then they went and settled with "it's a simulation. indoors. in the same room, every time."
Extra bonus points to the original mode in Burnout because it added a level of familiarity gained from the actual races. There's something pleasant about recognizing an intersection, a bridge or some other landmark from when you've been tearing up the streets in a race, and getting to watch something resembling everyday traffic chugging along on that same road - before sending a car shaped warhead into the crowd and watching it all fly apart.
Man, I hate to say it, but I don't have much faith in this studio's ability to recognize why the things they think should be fun are actually fun. Or maybe they do, but they continuously overextend outside their budget before even nailing the important parts, which is just as bad... Bummer.
I'm not really sure what the idea is of releasing a product with a 2 in the name, giving that support for a few years, releasing a brand new product with unique features compared to 2, then releasing paid content for 2 which takes content from the new one back into the old one... I guess 2 is the game they're intending to continue supporting with new stuff and Turbo was basically "the one we made for consoles, okay fine here's a PC port"? I mean I got Turbo because I was sort of hoping it'd pick up where 2 left off and be a more feature complete product for more immediate variation and satisfaction, like the previous games minus Stadium (which was free, anyway?) and stop the sort of modular, piecemeal thing 2 started off with which was obviously not a success since it immediately split the userbase and created confusion about which product to get.
Holy crap, I've been a fan of this series since Sunrise and even I have no idea what's going on anymore. Help!?
(Also bring back Island goddammit. Lagoon is close, but it's not a substitute.)
rox360's comments