I have to agree with reviewer "Jace"; a track like #73 sounds absolutely amazing. Meanwhile, a lot of the Zelda tunes and some of the MegaMan ones are (over)rated so highly for how often they have been heard.
Honestly, while the list itself turned out very good, I wonder if it would have been even better to have 2 or 3 (or even 1) guys who really know their shit to formulate the list all by themselves from a bunch of candidates.
I watched it, and as a play-around, it's pretty good. (As others have noted, there are other glitches and combos you could have used, but overall, entertaining stuff) However, my problem is with both the game choice and especially the existence of a very similar play-around for UMK3.
UMK3 is widely considered the best version of the early Mortal Kombat series, and certainly the definitive version for Mortal Kombat 3. And we have a very good play-around for that entry already.
Do we really need another play-around for an inferior version of essentially the same game?!
As much as I absolutely love fighting game movies on here, and want as many them as possible, my feeling is "No".
Here's a story my parents told me about their generation of the USSR (moozooh, AnS, and others can tell me if they have heard of this);
There was a certain Moscow family which kept and cared for a lion in their apartment for many years. They had brought it up since birth, and this particular lion was very famous, starring in not only circus shows, but television specials and movies.
Then, one day, the lion dismembered and partially ate two of the family members, and maimed a third one before the authorities came in and put it down.
Moral of the story- Don't keep lions as pets, cute as they are!
I voted yes for the extreme combos done but instead of picking the best characters,
When error001 wrote "best characters", he meant for the purposes of doing unique and cool-looking combos. Akuma and Ryu are easily the two best characters in SFA3, but a combo video with them wouldn't be anywhere as good.
And while Sim is a top-tier character, Rose is not.
As someone who has actually played SFA3, this was extremely impressive, and showed off a diverse, dizzying array of combos.
It seems to the majority of "no" votes are coming from people who aren't fans of fighting games and have never played this game specifically. For those that have, it's an awesome run. Easy yes vote.
Lex wrote:
Seeing that it doesn't look very cool, seeing no super-broken glitching, and knowing there's no actual speed goal, I'm voting no on this. It seems to me like any decent TASer could do this just by dicking around with both characters until the opponent dies.
1. I could easily make out the individual moves.
2. There's a ton of glitches being abused...
3. Your last statement is just factually incorrect; what error1 did is hardly "dicking around with both characters".
I was very pleasantly surprised; I expected to see an overload of tracks from a few popular sources, like Castlevania, FF, Metroid, and Megaman.
Thus far though, there has been a lot of variety, with a bunch of quality themes that are rarely mentioned. Excellent job, juef!
Just Finished the Maltese Falcon. ITs great. There is a bit of a difference between the book in the movie, but by the time you notice you have already been sucked in.
Actually, I'm curious about that; did you like the movie?
In the same way, by showing no emotion or concern over his sister's deteriorating physical and mental state, I don't believe they're trying to present Big Macintosh in the best possible light.
He may be one of those people that keeps a neutral facial expression unless under high levels of emotion. If he had no concern, the argument would have been over before Applejack took a violent stance.
He also has shown a concerned facial expression when Applejack took a violent stance during the argument. He could have been concerned over starting a fight (he is injured after all) or concerned he is going to lose the argument and Applejack will go through with it. He had the option to forfeit the argument for his own safety but he didn't. He instead continued his argument (with logic) which meant he was more concerned over losing the argument than his own safety.
Also keep in mind that Twilight attempted the exact same argument out of concern later in the episode and failed as badly as Big Mac. Seeing how even Twilight (a close friend) failed to overpower Applejack's pride, there was no point in Big Mac giving it another try. His position after the result of the last argument would have given him a disadvantage anyways.
Well, I certainly don't think Applejack was going to physically attack her older brother! Nothing in the series hints at her being unnecessarily violent towards her friends or family.
The rest of your arguments are reasonable, and I agree with them. But again, I feel that the series' creators saw it a bit differently with the way they were portraying Macintosh.
Maybe I'm stretching a bit, although can you really blame me after the slew of ugly, deformed, idiot, and/or villainous male ponies paraded throughout the series?
Dragonfangs wrote:
Post
You're arguing against something I've never written nor implied. I'm not saying that every single female character in the series is the embodiment of perfection, intelligence, and beauty while every single male character is the opposite of those qualities.
That's too fucking stupid and simplistic even for a little kids' show.
All I've noticed is a very clear difference between how any of the female ponies, villains or not, have been depicted, and the male duo in Episode 7.
Since I haven't (and probably won't) be watching the rest of the episodes, I asked if this was a valid trend for male characters on the show. According to your own response, the answer is "yes".
You can argue about the severity of this and nit-pick heroic flaws of the female protagonists as if it's a counter-balance for male characters that are functionally retarded, incompetent, purposely ugly, evil, and/or three times smaller than the female ponies, but the point remains.
I wouldn't really say so. There aren't that many male ponies in the series to begin with, but Snips and Snails are clearly on the extreme of things, with Prince Blueblood following pretty closely behind them. Then you have Big Macintosh which you've seen, snobby fashion critic Hoity Toity in Suited for Success(14), a couple of typical high school jock bullies in Sonic Rainboom(16) and Cutie Mark Chronicles(23), Applejack's cousin BraeBurn and Sheriff Silver Star in Over A Barrel(21) and Soarin in Best Night Ever(26).
Wow, guess my initial impression was no mistake. Males are depicted in an overwhelmingly negative/stupid manner in this show.
Dragonfangs wrote:
There is a slight negative trend here as none of these really get presented as being more than asshats and/or kind of slow, but not close to what you might extrapolate from seeing Snips and Snails :P. It does seem to lack a positively depicted male pony though.
"Slight" seems like a huge understatement here!
Compare this to the female characters, 90% of whom are good, and the other 10% who typically have redeeming qualities.
Dragonfangs wrote:
I was going to mention male non-ponies not being as bad, but then I realized that all of them except Spike and the Buffaloes are villains.
Haha. Of course!
Ferret Warlord wrote:
I don't see Big Mac as being "dumb" and "slow". Rather I see him as being easy going and full of simple wisdom. "Inconsiderate"? Just because he rightfully tells his sister she's being foolish and later reinforces the point?
Big Mac is one of my favorites for just how chill and relaxed he is. Everyone could stand to learn from him, even myself if this post is any indication!
I completely agree with you based on my own interpretation, but I meant what the show is portraying him to be. For example, to me Fluttershy is an idiotic, inconsistent, and occasionally mean/selfish character, but the show clearly wants us to consider her an exceptionally kind, generous pony.
In the same way, by showing no emotion or concern over his sister's deteriorating physical and mental state, I don't believe they're trying to present Big Macintosh in the best possible light.
After all, the show is all about compassion and caring, and he doesn't display it in that episode. Clearly, it's not as bad as the deformed, ugly, retarded male duo that wake the bear in the cave and almost bring about the destruction of the town, but I don't think he's supposed to be on the same level as the main (female) ponies.
What an ugly monster!
Anywho, over a week ago, when this topic was being discussed, I watched all the way up to episode 7, and then stopped.
Here's my question for fans of the series; are male ponies typically depicted in a profoundly negative way throughout MLP?
In Episode 7, there are two male unicorn ponies that are tiny in stature, ugly, with irritating voices, and are all-around morons that almost bring about the destruction of the town.
The only other male pony besides that was Applejack's older brother Macintosh, who, even though he looks normal, came across as dull-witted, inconsiderate, and lacking compassion. Is this a trend throughout the show?
Additionally, the motivation behind this movie seems to be primarily one of trolling. Saturn seems to revel in posting controversial and borderline movies. It's been mentioned before in this thread that Saturn has movies that would be accepted if he submitted them, but he doesn't submit them because he's rather submit something like this so he can get a lot of attention.
Honestly, were I a judge I'd be borderline about accepting this movie for only that reason.
So you're essentially judging the reputation of the person who submitted the movie, rather than the TAS itself? That seems like quite an unfair criteria, but hey, you're the judge.
On the other hand, it partially explains the voting. I guarantee that if some other player had submitted this exact same movie the percentage of yes votes would be higher...
Well, ultimately, you can define sci-fi however you like. However, under the definition you cited by Suvin "and whose main formal device is an imaginative framework alternative to the author's empirical environment., we are left with the conclusion that the genres of alternative history and even plain old historical fiction are really sci-fi!
I believe alternate history is indeed often considered a sub-genre of science fiction. As for historical fiction, I don't really see what would make it science fiction if the story and historical facts are based on reality. The setting isn't imaginative or alternative if such a setting has actually existed. I'm pretty sure that's what Suvin meant, anyway.
According to the definition you cited, the "imaginative framework" only has to be "alternative to the author's empirical environment".
Hence, whether it's based on reality or not is irrelevant. If the author has no first-hand experience with it, it still counts as science fiction, per your definition. Robert Graves, a professor in 20th century Britain writing about Rome 2,000 years ago certainly qualifies.
However, I've never before heard anyone refer to either "I, Claudius" or "Claudius the God" as works of science fiction! Or any similar historical fiction, for that matter.
A further problem is that it doesn't make much distinction between fantasy and science fiction. I know you mentioned something about fantasy not being possible in reality as the distinguishing trait, but it's not contained in Suvin's definition.
I think the part about cognition is supposed to sort of take that into account. He changed his definition in 1979 to "SF is distinguished by the narrative dominance or hegemony of a fictional "novum" validated by cognitive logic." In this definition the cognitive and logical aspects have been highlighted to distinguish sci-fi from fantasy. But as I said, these definitions have their flaws and according to Swirski no watertight definition has yet been established.
I was always under the impression that science fiction had to do with an imagined type or application of science that is central to the book's narrative. Seems like a straightforward definition that works for almost all cases.
Well, ultimately, you can define sci-fi however you like. However, under the definition you cited by Suvin "and whose main formal device is an imaginative framework alternative to the author's empirical environment., we are left with the conclusion that the genres of alternative history and even plain old historical fiction are really sci-fi!
After all, I would argue the civilization and society from a foreign land hundreds of years ago is plenty "alternative to the author's empirical environment". So is Robert Graves' "I Cladius" and "Cladius the God" science fiction? Not if you asked most people!
A further problem is that it doesn't make much distinction between fantasy and science fiction. I know you mentioned something about fantasy not being possible in reality as the distinguishing trait, but it's not contained in Suvin's definition.
But even if it were, not only have you shown that "The Time Machine" is supposedly fantasy instead of science fiction, but you've also shown that possibly the most famous science fiction writer ever, Jules Verne, was really a fantasy author!
And you've also shown that the most science fiction work ever, the novel that started the entire genre, "Frankenstein", is fantasy too!
Suffice to say, there seems to be a lot of contradiction and bizarre conclusions derived from such a definition.
Kyrsymis wrote:
That being said, at least one scientific invetion in 1984 comes to mind, namely the TVs that everyone had in their homes. It's been over ten years since I've read the book but I seem to remember that the TV was compulsory for everyone, and it acted as a receiver as well as a transmitter that could pick up everything that went on in the house (or room?). It was used by the thought police to monitor everyone around the clock.
Indeed, you remember correctly, although such technology already existed on a more primitive scale in the 1940s.
It's actually hinted that the Thought Police has a way to read and learn a citizen's thoughts, as they know each citizen's innermost fear. I guess you can loosely claim that's a sci-fi element of sorts, although their technology for doing so is never touched upon.
Still, by that definition, any amount of fiction is "sci-fi", since there is frequently something in a book that one wouldn't ordinarily encounter anywhere in our world.
Kyrsimys wrote:
Personally I have never been at all interested in sci-fi that isn't connected to our contemporary society. For me the allure of sci-fi has always been the "this could actually happen" factor and the investigation of consequences of things that aren't even that implausible. That's what makes it science fiction for me, not the setting or the science.
I tend to agree, but I think "Dune" has that going for it, too.
And anyways, there are far more kernels of thought on our human society and reality in a Terry Pratchett Discworld novel than there were in 90% of the Golden Age of Sci-Fi stories of a futuristic Earth I've encountered.
moozooh wrote:
Isn't the (more or less) recent movie Equilibrium basically a mixture of F451 and 1984?
I meant modern sci-fi books, not movies, but yeah, it's a mixture of the two plots. (Probably more Fahrenheit 451 than anything else) However, if you've haven't seen it, don't be under the appreciation that it's particularly deep or intellectual. It's not. Rather, it's a straightforward action flick that only briefly touches, in the most shallow of manners, on the overarching plots of those two books.
The site referenced has since been taken down. Internet wayback machine to the rescue! You can use the links on the top right to navigate to the other pages even though the pictures are missing. I like bisqwithitler.php the best.
Well, I'm gonna go back to making fake and cheated video edits (FCVE for short) now.
Also, some names on this list are rather generalized (Tarzan, as an example) so everybody on the internet named Tarzan is not necessarily a cheater, though if they speak of videos or gaming accomplishments wariness is in order.
Hilarious. I also cracked up laughing at this;
an eager preteen cheater under the moniker of "Bisqwit" had finished watching Morimoto's famous cheated moSMB3.wmv, and decided to research the video. He managed to find a link leading to the download of Famtasia... unlike others aware and/or knowledgeable of Famtasia, Bisqwit, in his preadolescent naivety, let loose the hounds of hell.
This should be included in a quote about the site's history.
To be fair, not using Frame Advance is a lot more defensible for side-scrolling beat em' ups and FF3 in particular than it would be in, for example, a platformer. In FF3 the optimal inputs are all simple to execute in real-time and especially slowdown (unless there's some undiscovered glitch, of course), and perfect reaction time versus excellent reaction time doesn't change a whole lot in this game.
Also, at the end of the day, it's the result that matters, not what was used to achieve it.
And this is a huge improvement over the presently published movie in terms of both speed and entertainment. Yes vote.
I like extremely few rap songs. Weak riffs, monotone sounds. The song AngerFist posted is a good example of this. Sorry Mr Fist. :/
Here is one which is good in instrumental version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dHi2xIuXx4
Heh, "Army of the Pharaohs" is one of the main bands my hip-hop loving friend linked me to to get an appreciation for the genre. The problem with them and that particular song is that while I like half the MCs, I can't stand the other half.
I am a fan of Vinnie Paz, though.
Truncated wrote:
These two videos are the same...unless you're implying that Stevie Wonder wrote the original Kirby theme. :)
Focus-
This is a cool track;
Link to video[/video]
Well, neither "1984" nor "Brave New World" is science fiction, especially the former.
If you seriously think this then you are using some very non-standard definition of science fiction. Both books are clearly science fiction according to almost any widely accepted definition (although science fiction is hard to define). Peter Swirski, who is a prominent figure in sci-fi literature research, has used both of these books as examples of dystopian science fiction in his lectures.
"Brave New World" has a few quasi sci-fi elements but they are mostly irrelevant/tangential to the main point of the work. But "1984" is a science fiction work? Really? Name me a single element of that work that remotely deals with science anything?
"1984" is one of my favorite books of all time, one of the greatest masterpieces of the 20th century, but just because it was writing about the future doesn't automatically make it "sci-fi" in my lexicon.
Kyrismys wrote:
Virtually no modern science fiction novel resembles "Fahrenheit 451" to any appreciable capacity
Is this another oversimplification?
No, why would it be? If you disagree, tell me some works that you felt have been influenced by Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451"?
You can even argue that it's a better book than "Dune", but it wasn't as influential for later writers.
Kyrismys wrote:
In what way, could you elaborate?
In the sense that it introduced a brand-new, strange, foreign world, with a large variety of unique characteristics, races, creatures, and individual characters.
That sounds like it would be true for any number of early sci-fi works, but think about it closely.
Most science fiction books before "Dune" were either connected to Earth and/or human civilization, so they were using an already established world. Or, if it was about exploring some foreign planet then it would typically only focus on a small part of that world. It wouldn't be unique and all-encompassing; it would essentially be "normal humans like us living on another planet...with one or two quirks!" (Murray Leinster's work is a good example)
Compare that to "Dune". However, since the time that "Dune" was published, a lot more writers have written really in-depth stories about completely bizarre, foreign worlds.
Hence, I consider the work an enormous influence on the genre.
I think a more important question is "what do you consider modern science fiction". Between Frankenstein and Dune classics such as War of the Worlds, Brave New World, 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and Asimov's Foundation trilogy had already been published and the whole Golden age of science fiction took place before Dune came out, so I'm not exactly sure what genre IronSlayer is referring to here.
Well, neither "1984" nor "Brave New World" is science fiction, especially the former.
However, you're right; I was massively over-simplifying. Just as important as what you listed are probably Jules Vernes' science fiction works like "Journey to the Center of the Earth" or "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", too. However, I see "Dune" it as having a greater influence on sci-fi works of the last 40 years than anything else listed above. Virtually no modern science fiction novel resembles "Fahrenheit 451" to any appreciable capacity, even though it's a great book.
But a massive number of modern sci-fi works I've read have a very clear link to "Dune". As such, I consider the most pioneering out of all those writings.
Throughout most of my life, I have had little to no respect for the genre of rap and hip-hop. I've hated most of it.
However, about six months ago, one of my friends from Ukraine, who is an enormous rap fan, started linking me to an incredible number of different songs. While I disliked most of it, to my surprise, I did find songs and artists that I really enjoyed.
In particular, there were 4 that I thought were very talented; k-os, PackFM, Tonedeff, and Hilltop Hoods.
Link to videoLink to videoLink to videoLink to video
Warp's whining has nothing to do with "profanity". (Although if it did, it would still be ridiculous)
Here's the first post of mine that he decided to start a meaningless debate over.
See if you can spot where I call the series in the topic an "expletive", or in fact, write anything particularly bad about it. I don't.
Anywho, it's hilarious that the guy thinks he can suppress other peoples' honest opinions about movies/TV series because he personally disagrees with them. (Again, the reactions of a child) Either that, or he really loves starting forum drama and meaningless bickering.
Focus-
Two days ago, I had my most pleasant surprise in years when it came to upcoming movies.
Apparently, my favorite comedy of all time, Johnny English, has released a sequel, Johnny English Reborn, that will make its way to US theaters this Friday.
Starring the legendary Rowan Atkinson (Black Adder, Mr. Bean), the original was an absolutely perfect parody of the Connery/Moore Bond films I watched incessantly growing up, as well as being a terrific comic gem in its own right.
I highly doubt the sequel will be as amazing, but the trailer was quite funny. The material there was all generic (which is fine in a comedy), but Atkinson's delivery made it humorous nonetheless.