You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics Mark all as read
Friends In Your Discord!
Miss having friends in your forum? We've migrated over to discord! Many of the threads that started here years ago continue on in a new setting.
Come join us!
Search options (Page 2 of 2)
Dorkman wrote:Squiggly_P wrote:I think it's kinda dumb to argue about how Widow's dressed and posed. This is ostensibly a movie targeted at teenage / 20-something males. At the very least, it's based on books that are definitely targeted at that specific group. It shouldn't surprise anyone that they'd sexualize the one major female character. While the rest of the characters aren't necessarily sexualized, they're definitely idealized. The target demographic says "I want to be Cap, I want to be Hawkeye, I want to be Thor" but they don't say "I want to be Black Widow". They say "I want to be Thor and I want to fuck Black Widow".
And that is sexism and some people -- like the people who made that image -- find sexism objectionable. The target demographic would still see the movie if Black Widow weren't reduced to an object in the poster. It's sexist against men to think they need that and it's sexist toward women to put them in that position, literally and figuratively. Why not give girls someone THEY'D want to be?
The reason why comic book women aren't role models is because comic books were never meant for women. Sure nowadays you can find some girls who enjoy comic books, but a decade ago I'm guessing it was extremely rare to find one who even knew who black widow was. Comic books were created for horny adolescent boys, which is why the gender roles are the way they are (one idealized and the other sexualized). Is it sexist? Probably, but this sort of stereotyping is present in many different genres. For example in family sitcoms it will often be the wife that is responsible/smart/solves problems while the husband is lazy/carefree/gets into problems. Or in the case of a black sitcom (a sitcom directed towards black people, not a dark comedy sitcom) the white families will be either rich/dumb or racist. I don't necessarily think its right to have these stereotypes, but that's where I think most of them stem from. Plus with a character like black widow you sort of need her to be over sexualized don't you? Since her name implies she seduces her targets then kills them when shes done with them.
Also @Squiggly you could watch suckerpunch, that movies basically made to be a sleazy action flick.
Squiggly_P wrote:Here's another random thought about games:
What happens when you remove all the numbers, aside from those that tell you how much of a thing you have. Ten gold, three potions, two pairs of pants, etc. Remove stat points, remove health bars, remove experience bars, remove the damage rating for weapons, the armor rating for armor. Your choices are now based on your intuition and how something looks. Replace the numbers with visual / audio cues.
With swords, for instance, you could tell the player if it feels heavy, if it feels sharp, where it's balanced, etc, and they could judge whether it was better than what they already have based on that. For health, you could have an icon system that would let the player know how badly they're hurt and where, and maybe have a better damage model that would allow for limb wounds to affect combat / movement / perception of the world (permanent deafness / blindness?). Also, in a multiplayer environment, remove the chat and player names and replace with speech balloons or something similar. You can only 'hear' people nearby. Have whipser and shout commands so you can speak softly to nearby players only, or shout that will let people 'hear' your speech bubble coming from farther away.
Would the lack of other numbers shift the focus to getting lots of money as opposed to leveling your character or finding the best gear? Would people still play WoW or Skyrim if they had no idea how much damage / experience / level / health they had? Would that sort of chat and lack of knowledge of other players encourage more actual roleplaying and draw players in, or would it repel them?
Would you play WoW, or The Elder Scrolls Online if it were set up that way?
Sorry, I'm posting in a lot of threads today cause I've been offline for like three days and just got my shit fixed 
I don't think a game like this would work, or at the very least if it did draw people in it would not draw the same kind of people. The thing about MMO's (massive multiplayer online) is that they draw in people who like to feel a sense of accomplishment. This is usually done through these number values (level, money, items, etc). Literally the only thing needed to be successful at an MMO is time, sure some people can get to a higher level more efficiently than others, but really the only thing required is time. They are designed this way because its an easy way to get people to play longer. You reward them for doing something that anyone can do (this way no one ever hits a wall as they would in real life), making them feel as if they are working towards something, and in return design a bunch of meaningless tasks that just take a long amount of time to do. It keeps them playing until they realize that they really arent achieving anything because they're stuck in this vicious cycle (farm gold to get good armour to fight better monsters to get better armour to fight even better monsters.
I guess with the kind of game you're suggesting the goal of the game would change from accomplishing something to simply experiencing the world. Sort of like minecraft, but more abstract I guess. The only problem is, experiencing this world by yourself is pretty lonely and depressing. If you aren't going to give them that instant gratification of accomplishing something, you need to give them communication so that they can play with friends. With both of these things missing, I don't think the game would work.
Zarban wrote:But the project offered me another opportunity to harangue my nephew for not being much of a nerd. I've ribbed him in the past about how he can't do any computer programming or other nerd stuff, never heard of Mystery Science Theater 3000, and doesn't even know what an Internet meme is. I ask you: what's a geek uncle—or "guncle"—to do?
What a great world we live in where you can tease someone for not being a nerd. Makes me feel kind of bad for all the nerds that used to get teased in high school
I saw it in 3D, its not too bad if you can get decent seats. But I've heard if you are at the front the 3D looks really blurry
Just watched it, and I really wish people wouldn't bring their baby kids to the theatre (there were like 3 different ones crying through a lot of the film). The movie was fun, but I really didn't think it was anything too special. I agree that the Hulk really stole the show, ruffalo did a great job as banner, and the other guy was a great addition too. The action scenes were also pretty well done. But honestly the story just never did it for me. I know you aren't supposed to walk into a movie like this expecting a great and intriguing story line, but I couldn't help but feel like something was missing when I walked out. I also don't think this film comes anywhere near the level of The Dark Knight. I know they're supposed to be different, but dark knight was much stronger in my opinion. I think a lot of it has to do with the lack of stakes that trey mentioned.
Now that I think about it, this movie is sort of like a perfectly made sandwich. As far as sandwiches go, its amazing. But I'd rather have a decent steak, than a perfect sandwich.
Usually I listen to just the commentary. Mainly because I can usually remember the movies pretty well, and I don't need to watch along to understand what they are talking about. However there are certain commentaries where they talk about noticing something in a certain scene where it would help to listen while watching the movie (for example the fight club commentary where you can spot tyler at the beginning of the movie). In one rare case (Pulp Fiction), I started watching along with the commentary but had to turn off the commentary because I was just too into the movie.
God that dark knight trailer is awesome. You know, the batman mask never really bothered me in any of the movies, but for some reason it looks a little silly in the trailer.
How about an intermission on time travel in movies, and whether you guys think it can ever be pulled off effectively or not. I was talking to a friend recently about Looper and I told him that the time travel aspect could ruin it for me very quickly. I think the main problem with time travel is that it either makes the movie too complicated too quickly, or it leaves the plot full of holes. In Looper I told my friend that sending someone back in time is actually much more risky than just disposing of the body in the current time frame. This is basically because if the looper did not manage to kill someone, or even if the looper decided to betray the organization, he could simply kill all of the current members while they were kids. Then you get into the whole "impact of the past on the future" thing where you don't know whether time is one line that can be changed (i.e doing something in the past will get rid of the current future and replace it with a new one) or whether changing the past creates a series of parallel universes. Either way the story gets complicated quickly. It's because of something like this that I don't think time travel should ever be used as a gimmick in movies, as it seems to ruin many movies and t.v shows (Heroes most notably for me).
This discussion never really goes anywhere, particularly since the term art is super vague to begin with. I think an easier way to discuss it is to look at it from a different perspective. What most people that push video games as art are trying to say is that video games are as "sophisticated" as other mediums(film, literature, etc). In my eyes, this really only boils down to one aspect of a video game, and that's the story of the game. I see it as sort of like a scale, where on one side you have things like your Call of Duty or your NFS. Games where the story only exists to give meaning to the gameplay. And on the other side you have things like Heavy Rain, which is basically almost like an interactive movie. And in the middle you have your portals and your GTA's, games that have both good gameplay and a good story. So basically yes, I think video games can be just as expressive as movies/books, but I also think that very few video games are.
Posts found: 26 to 34 of 34
