jump to navigation

Rainiac’s Top 20 Games of All Time July 15, 2009

Posted by Rainiac in game reviews, gaming blogs, rants.
2 comments

I recently read FI’s list of his top 20 games of all time, and put simply, it got me thinking. And since he invited his fellow non-Losers to follow his example, I figured I’d be the first to take him up on that offer and post my own top 20 list. As with Frezno’s, this list is in no real order of preference, and also like Frezno’s, I’ll only be listing one game per franchise. I confess that I haven’t played as many video games as I perhaps should have, and if you add to that the fact that the last console I bought was a Nintendo GameCube, you can probably figure out for yourself that I’m not going to list many more recent titles. I must point out that this is just my personal opinion and there were other titles that narrowly didn’t make the cut, so if for some reason you have a problem with my list feel free to air that grievance in the comments. Just keep things civil, that’s all I ask. And now, without further ado, click the link below and let’s get ready to rumble…

(more…)

Advertisements

Frezno’s Top 20 Games Of All Time July 12, 2009

Posted by Frezno in gaming blogs, rants.
add a comment

Oh holy crap, now what am I up to? Well, thanks to my academic researchings on the Intertubes, I have been inspired to do a countdown of my personal top 20 games of all time. I figure, hey, my opinions probably interest the five people that read this. Probably maybe. It was kind of tricky to get 20 games, thanks to my stipulations. Y’see, I’m a big JRPG nut and could just put five Final Fantasies, four Dragon Quests, the Mother trilogy, and other franchises on there and call it a list. But that shit would be boring, ne? So, I limited myself to one game per franchise I love. Also, the ranking may be numbered, but it doesn’t mean I love one thing more than another. It’s completely arbitrary and just for kicks. One last thing before we start; I freely invite any Non-Loser reading this to make their own Top list. Can be a Top 10, a Top 15, a Top 20. Whatever you want. Let’s participate and make this a group project, hey? Since this list will likely be long as hell, you can click that little button to see the thing in full. Go on, you know you wanna. Push it. Yeah.
(more…)

Hard-Ass Games: Super Ghouls ‘n Ghosts June 17, 2009

Posted by Frezno in game reviews, rants.
12 comments

Update: As of 4 years ago, I’m full of shit.

Welcome to what will hopefully become a running series here on our little blog, “Hard-Ass Games”. It’s a simple little featurette that takes a look at ridiculously difficult old-school games, and breaks down for the uninitiated exactly why they give any old-timey gamer the chills whenever mentioned. So, let’s get to it.

Before they hit the big time with franchises like Mega Man and Street Fighter, Capcom created an infamously sadistic platformer called Ghosts ‘n Goblins in 1985. Playing as a knight named Arthur, you fought your way through levels full of demons and zombies in order to save a kidnapped princess(It wasn’t quite cliche back then). Despite its notorious difficulty, it did fairly well and prompted an arcade sequel three years later, called Ghouls n’ Ghosts. Both Ghosts ‘n Goblins and Ghouls ‘n Ghosts recieved several ports, but a true sequel to Ghouls ‘n Ghosts would not come until the release of the Super Nintendo. Capcom summoned the most nefarious tricks and traps they could think up, then added twice that many when Super Ghouls ‘n Ghosts finally hit store shelves. Now, something a little notable in regards to this blog; A handful of us have our hands in some of the spinoff games and tributes to the franchise. OZ has completed a full LP of the final game in the Gargoyle’s Quest series, Demon’s Crest. Rizu is planning out LPs of both Maximo games, and I myself intend to do the older Gargoyle’s Quest games (that’s a fact, not a plug). Aside from Not Dave’s one-shot video of Mega Man vs. Ghosts ‘n Goblins, though, none of us have tackled the original series. Why is that?

BECAUSE IT’S FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE.

This rundown may only cover Super Ghouls ‘n Ghosts, but many of the dastardly tricks that make the difficulty skyrocket are present in the older games as well. To fully grasp it, I’ll explain how the game plays in its most basic form. Arthur runs left to right, shooting at enemies with whatever weapon he might happen to be wielding. New weapons can be obtained from treasure chests, as well as upgrades to your armor. Bronze armor gives whatever weapon you’re holding an upgraded power boost, and gold armor lets you charge up your attack to unleash a super attack. Arthur can jump to avoid enemies, and do a second jump in the air to clear some of the trickier jumps in the game. Doesn’t sound so bad, does it? A shining example of the golden age of platforming? You don’t truly know the hell Arthur has to go through until you play it. This game is HARD. H-A-R-D HARD. Even on Easy, even on the first level, if you go into this fresh, the game will tear you limb from limb. Only the most adaptable will be able to beat the first level blind without using a continue, let alone not dying. Allow me to explain just what this game does that has put it on many a “Hardest Game Ever” list.

First and foremost, you get two hits before dying. No life bars, no health upgrades, nothing of the sort. Getting hit once knocks off your armor and treats you to the comical sight of Arthur running around in boxers, vainly trying to survive. Another hit while in your drawers kills you. Oh, and when I say “two hits” I mean it; even if you get the super-great golden armor that smites anything in its path, landing on something will knock all that stuff off and leave you nearly naked. Granted, there are shields for the gold armor that block projectiles and take a hit or two.. but they’re hard to come by, and irrelevant if you take body contact damage.Wait, what about the treasure chests? Can’t you just get new armor from those? Capcom is way ahead of you there, and threw a little surprise in to fuck you over. Every so often, opening a treasure chest will spawn a wizard that appears, shoots a ball of magic at you, and vanishes. If the spell hits you, you are temporarily transformed into a helpless form, like a baby or a woman (Don’t look at me, feminists, Capcom’s to blame for that). The change only lasts for a few seconds, but if there are enemies about, chances are you’re going to get hit and die.. all because you were trying to get your armor back. Talk about kicking someone when they’re down..

The worst offense is something you might never even see, but if you have, it’s guaranteed to enrage. Let’s play hypothetical for a second here. You’ve been practicing for weeks to conquer this game, and have a Saturday with nothing else to do, so you load it up. Through much sweat and tears, you slowly advance through the game, getting through all the little tricks the game has to offer. You’re on the second-to-last level now, and there’s a big boss blocking the way to the final level. Summoning all the luck you can, you somehow manage to pull a win by the skin of your teeth. Hooray! It’s time for the.. final… bat..tle… Wait. The princess is talking to you. And telling you that the final boss, the evil Sardius, can only be defeated with the “Goddess Bracelet”. Now what in the hell is that? She tells you to come back here with the bracelet in tow, and..
You may stare at the TV for a moment, utterly stunned at what just transpired. Perhaps your mind can’t comprehend what just happened. You’re back at the first level again, and you have to start the entire game over again in order to get the true ending. By now the average gamer is screaming like a banshee, and probably smashing the cartridge into atoms in a white-hot rage. For the rest of you, let me explain what needs to be done to get the Goddess Bracelet. You need gold armor on your second playthrough, and need to find it in a treasure chest. If that’s not tricky enough, NOW you need to keep it. For the rest of the game, until you get back to the level 7 boss. Only then can you fight the true final boss. Oh, did I mention this weapon is pretty crappy if you’re in your boxers? You know, like you probably will be since this game is merciless? Yeah… have fun with that.

It’s for these reasons that the G&G series has earned its infamy in video game lore as quite possibly the hardest series ever designed by humans. Maybe humans didn’t even make it at all; this game may be the devil’s work, and impossible to conquer in a subtle attempt at saying that darkness will triumph over light. I dunno though, let’s just say that Super Ghouls ‘n Ghosts is fucking hard, and leave it at that.

Rainiac Reviews: Blues Brothers 2000 June 15, 2009

Posted by Rainiac in film reviews, rants.
add a comment

Before I begin, just a little notice about the finale of Let’s Play Kick Master. All the footage has been recorded (shitty laptop handling issues be damned) but as of yet I haven’t had much chance to record the commentary. That might change later this week though, so watch this space…

Anyway, I’ve decided to start doing movie reviews. And for the first review, there’s only one film I could possibly choose. Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, I bring you a review of…

The poster for Blues Brothers 2000

For those not in the know on who the Blues Brothers were/are (and I’m guessing that’s the majority of people reading this), allow me to fill you in with a little backstory. The Blues Brothers began life as a real-life band in Canada, led by comic actors Dan Aykroyd (Known, amongst other things, for the Ghostbusters films) and John Belushi. The two were avid fans of the musical genre known as Rhythm and Blues, and decided to gather talented musicians to form their own Blues band, with themselves as the singers. Their goal was to try and re-introduce the world to rhythm and blues. Rather than performing under their real names, the two comics adopted fictional personas: Jake (Belushi) and Elwood (Aykroyd) Blues, and became the Blues Brothers. The newly formed Blues Brothers Band released their first album in 1978, ‘a Briefcase full of Blues’, which was a moderate success. However, it was in 1980 that the band really took off, when all of them (with the exception of the band’s original keyboardist Paul Shaffer, who had commitments to Saturday Night Live at the time and had his role in the band taken by an actor-musician called Murphy Dunne) appeared in the now- cult classic, The Blues Brothers, a movie which to this day ranks among my all-time favourites, in large part due to some absolutely manic car chases and just hilarious comedy overall. Sadly, tragedy struck in 1982 when John Belushi died prematurely, stymieing the inevitable sequel. Finally, in 1998, Dan Aykroyd decided the time had come to make that sequel, and so Blues Brothers 2000 was born. With Belushi dead, they obviously couldn’t bring back Jake, so Aykroyd wisely took the Band in a new direction, introducing a new co-singer in ‘Mighty’ Mack McTeer (played, quite well I might add, by John Goodman), and adding two more ‘Brothers’ to the fold: Buster Blues (J. Evan Bonifant), an orphan boy who Elwood is tasked with mentoring, and Cab (Joe Morton), who starts off as the chief of police and is determined to hunt down and arrest Elwood but has a change of heart later in the film and joins the band instead. Having loved the original so much, I was under the impression that the sequel would be just as good…

Sadly, after finally watching this film for the first time this year, I was left with the sense that perhaps they shouldn’t have bothered making it after all. It’s not a terrible film by any means, but it does have some major flaws which prevent it from even lacing up the boots of the original. Perhaps the first problem it has is that it tries too hard to be like the original. Obviously, there’s always going to be some of the original present in any sequel, but I feel that BB2000 took it to an unwarranted extreme. People featured in the original, like Frank Oz, Aretha Franklin and even James Brown not only return, but return in their original roles, while some of the concepts and gags feel unnecessarily recycled. There’s too many examples to mention, but ones that stood out in particular include Cab beaming up to heaven and claiming “he’s seen the light”, which is eerily similar to the way Jake has a heavenly epiphany in the original. Also, the Russian gangsters who act as the primary antagonists of the film (other than the ever-present Police) are clearly an attempt to re-create the Neo-Nazis from the first film without actually including the Neo-Nazis. Worse still, the few original gags that are used aren’t that funny to begin with, and one scene, where Elwood dashes out of ‘Bob’s Country Kitchen’ (a not so subtle reference to ‘Bob’s Country Bunker’ from the first film) with shaving form all over his face in an attempt to escape a policewoman who has entered the diner to find and arrest him, is downright cringeworthy. That being said, Elwood saying to the band “there’s no looking back” after a particularly crazy pile-up only for them to look back as one man was pretty funny, I must admit, but that one gag can’t cover up the fact that the film as a whole had few original jokes that were actually funny…

The film has other problems too. While the original certainly had elements that were ‘fantastical’, for the most part the film was half-grounded in reality and logic, and was all the better for it. It managed to be chaotic without being ridiculous. Sadly, the sequel takes a turn for the worse by including voodoo, a divine lightning bolt from the heavens which takes out a Russian sniper, a white supremacist being crushed to death by a powerboat that somehow gets launched 40 feet into the air just by the Band driving their car (which can drive underwater: eat your heart out James Bond) underneath the boat and then driving off, and Cab’s aforementioned conversion. These elements felt like they were tacked on (although again, they did have their funny moments) and in all honesty I would have preferred not to see them (especially the voodoo), but maybe that’s just me. Perhaps the reason for these apparent faults is due to the film’s rating. The original was a 15 certificate and was proud of that fact, making frequent use of foul language and more ‘adult’ content, and funnily enough the film was all the better for it. Blues Brothers 2000, however, is a PG, which goes a long to way to explaining why the film is like it is. By opting to go PG, they made sure they couldn’t possibly recreate the original’s feel and magic. It was probably a smart decision on the film makers’ part (not that smart mind, the film tanked), but as a die hard aficionado of the first film, I can’t help but feel disappointed by what BB2000 is and what it might have been if they’d just been a bit braver and even made it a 12A as opposed to a PG.

That’s not the say everything about the film is bad, however. The new characters introduced actually work pretty well. Mack McTeer is a fairly good replacement for Jake Blues, and the addition of Buster Blues, while an embodiment of the new PG direction, was sheer genius and works well within the context of the film (technically, it’s Buster who’s Jake’s replacement, not Mack, but since Mack has Jake’s old spot in the band, that’s who I see as Jake’s replacement). Cab, on the other hand, is underused after he joins the band, but you can’t win them all. There’s also some nice nods to the first film, with old characters and concepts returning and even a cameo for Paul Shaffer, the man who wasn’t able to appear in the original. Best of all, the film has an absolutely awesome soundtrack which I would wholly recommend you try and track down if you can. Standout tracks include a unique Blues twist on the old theme tune to Perry Mason and ‘Looking for a Fox’, belted out by Goodman (who can surprisingly sing pretty damn well), but pretty much all of the soundtrack is good in one way or another.

Try as it might, however, Blues Brothers 2000 just can’t escape the ghost of John Belushi. However decent John Goodman is as his replacement, it’s missing his indomitable presence and that’s why it just can’t measure up to the original. I’m not saying you shouldn’t watch this film, hell, maybe you should just for the music, but if you do decide to take the plunge, a word of advice: go in with low expectations. That way you might just be pleasantly surprised…

A Rant On Innovation In Games June 9, 2009

Posted by Frezno in rants.
2 comments

Yesterday, a friend of mine let me borrow The World Ends With You. For those not in the know, it’s a DS RPG published by Square-Enix that’s regarded as one of the best on the system. If I may quote Nintendo Power’s take on it:

“Coming from a publisher that’s not known for taking risks these days, The World Ends With You is one of the most bravely experimental titles on a platform renowned for innovation.”

Now, that’s exactly what I want to talk about today; Innovation. Some of my favorite games are fresh takes on old overplayed ideas. Let’s take the Mother/Earthbound series as an example. The developers decided to take the basic RPG structure of the wildly popular Dragon Quest games, and change the setting from medieval to modern. Gold became debit cards, saving became phoning your dad, swords became baseball bats. Such a twist had never been done before, and propelled Mother to a modest following in Japan. On the other side of the world, though, all we saw was the sequel, Mother 2; better known as “Earthbound”. Taking the same ideas as Mother but injecting massive amounts of quirkiness and humor, it too gained popularity.. in Japan, that is. Over here, it was a bomb as far as sales are concerned. The game and series, however, gained a cult following (and I do mean CULT; take a stroll through Starmen.net sometime and you’ll see what I mean). Mother fans were further denied as time went by; the GBA ports of the first two games weren’t translated, nor was the GBA sequel, Mother 3. Even a rumored Virtual Console release of Earthbound was later found to be bogus. Despite the rabid small following it DOES have, it seems that Nintendo has deemed translating the Mother series to be a waste of money.

Earthbound isn’t the only innovative series to fall victim to general obscurity, though. Another fine example would be Actraiser. Released by Enix near the start of the Super Nintendo’s lifespan, it had PHENOMENAL music, as well as an interesting genre mashup; while half the game was your standard action/platformer, the other half was a simulation mode where you built towns up to prosperity while keeping them safe from invading monsters. To this day, Actraiser is still remembered fondly in certain circles as an amazing all-around game. The same cannot be said for Actraiser 2, though; released three years later, it did away with the simulation part and was just a straight-up action game. To further complicate things, it was a frustratingly hard action game. In 15 years, we haven’t seen another Actraiser game. How about Startropics? A pair of top-notch action/adventure games released by Nintendo for the NES, Startropics is what you would get if you put Zelda and Earthbound in a blender and drank the sweet sweet smoothie that resulted. Partly a victim of obscurity and bad design decisions, Startropics hasn’t seen a new entry in 15 years. Think about that for a second, folks; there are kids in high school who have been alive as long as these games have been forgotten. Why? Why can’t we have our Mother 3, or Actraiser 3, or Startropics 3?

The answer’s fairly simple, I believe; Game companies exist to make a profit. As beloved as these games may be by their various small fanbases, that’s just it; they’re SMALL fanbases. The millions that would need to be spent to make these things a reality just wouldn’t turn a profit; there’s too little a group for them. But, why is that? If they’re such great games, why don’t they have huge fanbases? I have an answer to that as well, as controversial as it might be; People are sheep. Look at what sells these days, gamewise; established big series like Halo, GTA, Final Fantasy, and the like; series that don’t drastically change too much from installment to installment. Sure, you have prettier locales and new things to do, but it’s still familiar territory.. and, for the publishers, a safe bet. Slap Final Fantasy on something, and it’ll sell like hotcakes. Remake the old ones, they’ll still sell metric tons and have you having sex with your wife on a bed of money. People like what’s familiar, and only rarely do they try new things out. This is part of the reason why unique series like Mother or Startropics wouldn’t be profitable in a business sense; we’re afraid of change.

It’s not just games, either. Recently, a friend of mine was griping to me about how the TV show Reaper was officially cancelled. As a fan of the show, he was upset that such a witty and amusing show was canned while the formulaic still thrived. He said something about it that struck a chord with me, and I quote him now:
“Oh, but don’t worry, you can still watch formulaic crap like House, CSI: Miami, and Law and Order, but say goodbye to actually FUCKING ORIGINAL SHOWS like Reaper and Pushing Daisies.”
Now, a little word game for you all; replace “House” with “Halo”, and “Reaper” with “Startropics”. Surprisingly, the analogy still fits. The established same-old will be here to stay because we love the familiar, and it’s the unique and innovative stuff that suffers for it. Let it be known that I’m not condemning all “popular” games; my shelf of Final Fantasy, Megaman, and Zelda games would come to life and slap me for being hypocritical. I’m just saying, every once in a while, take a chance and give something new a shot. Something like The World Ends With You; a very bold move for an accused “rehash king” like Square-Enix. Who knows what you’ll find if you give the obscure a chance? Could be crap, sure… but it could also be the most fun and stylish experience you’ve had in a long time.

Rainiac Rants: Nintendo’s E3 Conference & the State of Gamers Today June 2, 2009

Posted by Rainiac in gaming blogs, rants.
3 comments

So early this morning (5 o clock this afternoon for any fellow Brits reading this blog post), Nintendo gave their annual E3 press conference. I was watching the event live while chatting on Skype to several of the other Non-Losers. There were highs and lows, as is the case with any gaming conferences, but the highs were pretty damn good. Nintendo revealed New Super Mario Bros Wii (a FOUR PLAYER Mario platformer), Super Mario Galaxy 2, Golden Sun DS (the revealing of which took EVERYBODY by surprise) and perhaps the piece de resistance, Metroid Other M, an apparent prequel to Metroid Prime that will delve deeper into Samus’ backstory and doesn’t appear to be an FPS this time. I’m sure most of you would agree that in itself was an amazing haul (OZ certainly would: the sheer appearance of Metroid Other M was enough to make him literally wet himself). Add in footage of Mario & Luigi: Bowser’s Inside Story, The Conduit and Resident Evil Dark Chronicles and needless to say it was very entertaining to watch, and very encouraging for the future. However, there was one thing that was incredibly annoying and disconcerting, and that was the general reaction of the fans in the live chat as the conference was actually going on. While everyone in the Skype chat was pretty damn excited, the so-called gaming fans couldn’t give a shit. They were all lambasting Nintendo, saying it was even worse than last year’s showing (which I’ll freely admit wasn’t that great). At first I put it down to Sony and Microsoft fanboys turning up just to start trouble, but I later realised that it was more than that. It might sound like a massive overreaction, but the main reason why the conference got that reaction is simple: today’s gamers are spoilt.

What exactly do I mean by that? Cast your mind back to the early to mid 90s, around the time I and presumably most of the other non-Losers first got into video games. Back then games were a hell of a lot simpler than they are now. The graphics weren’t nearly as fancy, and the gameplay was much more basic in many respects. Most titles on the ‘2nd gen’ of home consoles (Genesis, SNES) were in 2D (with a few exceptions), but the gameplay was compelling, addictive, and in some cases groundbreaking. Inevitably video games moved into 3D with the introduction of the Playstation, N64 and Dreamcast, but while graphics were improved it was still about the gameplay first and foremost. That’s why titles like Super Mario World, Sonic 3 & Knuckles and Banjo-Kazooie still appeal today: because the basic gameplay is solid as a rock, and as a result they’re still very enjoyable.

Fast forward to 2002. Enter the PS2, XBox and Gamecube. Exit heavy emphasis on gameplay coming first…

OK, so that may be a little harsh, but once home consoles moved on from the N64 and PSOne, graphics within games were markedly improved, and conversely games which had great graphics but mediocre at best gameplay began to emerge (no need to offer any examples here, I’m sure we’ve all played at least one of them). And then it hit me that this is where the problem I spotted again during the conference first sprang up. The vast majority of people who play games today are teenagers, in other words, people first came into video games at a time where style (graphics) became superior to substance (gameplay).

The proof for this argument? Today’s generation of home consoles, that is, the PS3, the 360, and the Wii. While 360 and PS3 have produced some great titles I can’t shake the feeling that for these 2 consoles it’s more about looking good than playing good. The Wii is by no means perfect, but at least they’ve made attempts to be innovative and look like they’ll continue to do so. Perhaps that explains the fairly negative reactions for the Wii in comparison to its rivals: Wii appeals more to gamers who grew up around the same time as me as well as families, while XBox 360 and PS3 appeal more to those who came across gaming later.

So perhaps I shouldn’t be angry at the people who mocked Nintendo during today’s conference. Perhaps they couldn’t help it because they don’t know any better…

(IMPORTANT NOTE: The following rant was only my own personal opinion. I have no intention to cause offense and if you feel I managed to offend you, that was not my plan and I apologise in advance. Also, if this rant is well-enough received, I may turn this into a semi-regular feature on this blog, so your feedback would be appreciated. Toodles)

Let’s Players – common traits May 13, 2009

Posted by ssskinner in rants.
add a comment

Sorry to post again so soon, but I wanted to write this for a while and just got around to it!

I’ve been LPing for quite a while now (since August 2008). Not an excessive amount of time since some people have been doing it regularly since 2007, but it’s still a considerable amount of time. I have met some great friends through LPing, but I have noticed that even outside of the people I know, LPers have a lot of common traits. Besides the ones you’d think of, like that most are men, gamers, and around 18-25 years old, there are a couple of odd coincidences I’ve noticed.

The first is that a lot of LPers have cats. raocow has made numerous references to Gaston, his “big fat tabby.” DeceasedCrab has a meowing cat in a few of his videos. I haven’t watched a lot of DC, but what I’ve seen, he just says, “Be quiet, kitty!” Another LPer with a meowing cat is L0rdVega. During his Hitman LP, one of his cats decided she wanted to help with commentary. I’m sure there are many Let’s Players who have quiet cats that don’t bother them while they’re recording, but I know of a few outside of this list who also have at least one kitty. (I’m allergic, but when I lived with my mom, I lived with a few cats I have had since their birth — they’re probably around 15 now.)

The other strange thing I’ve noticed is the amount of LPers who are seriously into metal music. UltraJMan is one of the more vocal about his love for metal, since he plays in a metal band. I’ve met a bunch of other LPers who dig metal, everything from power to death to funeral doom. Hell, some of these people are even from Finland, a place where some of the scariest metal people come from, the ones who like actually kill and wear each other as necklaces.

So, if you’ve been thinking about starting out with making Let’s Plays, or have and don’t know how what to say to a fellow LPer, ask him about his cat or what he thinks of the new Candlemass CD. If nothing else, it’s better than that ever annoying question, “How are you?” and it might start an actual conversation!

He IS Daffy Duck March 29, 2009

Posted by SoapyNome in miscellaneous, rants.
Tags: ,
4 comments
Lately there has been some controversy with my LP of “Maui Mallard in Cold Shadow”. People have been saying “fuck you, it’s Donald, not Daffy”. Welp, I’m here to prove them wrong.Which is which?

First off, may I please direct you to this one episode of “Duck Amuck”? Follow the link here:

Please notice that this so called “Daffy Duck” is painted into a Sailors suit at about 3:53. Now think, who else wears a Sailors suit? That’s right: Donald Duck. I think it’s pretty obvious that THE BLACK DUCK IS AN IMPOSTER! Here’s how:

The imposter, black duck that we today call Daffy first appeared in 1937 in “Porkys Duck Hunt”. The other duck who is in the game “Maui Mallard” first appeared in 1934 in “The Wise Little Hen”. Here is obviously what happened:

Donald came first (the white duck). But what we don’t know, is his name was originally “Daffy”. Then came along “Daffy Duck”, (the black duck) in 1937, but HIS name was originally “Donald”. Confusing, right? Well, it will all become clear. Obviously, the black duck was jealous of the white one, and wanted the name of “Daffy”. So, he grabbed a brick, and knocked the white duck out. Then he cast a special TV broadcast on all channels to brainwash everyone into think that his name was “Daffy”, even the developers of the ducks.

So, all along it was a trick from the black duck. The white one was, in fact, Daffy Duck. So, in conclusion, I’m right, he’s motherfucking Daffy, get over it.

The Little Mermaid is fucked in the head. March 22, 2009

Posted by Frezno in rants.
10 comments
Ariel is batshit insane

Ariel is batshit insane

So, I got a question on my Q&A thing asking me “What Disney princess would you punch in the face?” (thank you for that, Rizu). As research for it, I watched two Disney movies; “Sleeping Beauty” and “The Little Mermaid”. Now, in the Q&A I said I would punch Princess Aurora in the face. After seeing The Little Mermaid, I immediately regret this decision.

I hadn’t seen this movie in years, and I knew it like, revitalized the Disney animated movies and paved the way for the good shit like Aladdin and The Lion King. So, hell yes, important animation landmark. Pop the VHS into the old VCR (cause I’m an old-timey dude like that), watch some old previews (HOLY SHIT YOU GUYS, MULAN IS COMING SUMMER 1998), and bingo, movie begins. It actually starts off okay, our heroine is alright. Ariel is some cute redhead mermaid who likes to look for people-treasure, and collect it and put it in a secret grotto. I collect shit too, hey, you’re not so different from me. How could you be a crazy person?

And then she happens upon a prince on a boat that so happens to sink in a big old storm, and she saves his ass from drowning. Well hey, Ariel, good for you, how heroic of you– WAIT WHY ARE YOU CARESSING HIS CHEEK LIKE THAT
No. Ohh no, don’t do this to me you crazy fishlady.. Oh fuck. She’s “in love”. She’s swimming around the ocean palace humming to herself all happy like some lovestarved seapuppy. Because of a guy she saved from drowning. A man she has NEVER EXCHANGED WORDS WITH. How do you know if he’s a good guy, Ariel? He might be a murderer or something, HOW WOULD YOU KNOW YOU NEVER TALKED TO HIM

The final nail in the coffin is when she finds that her little fish friend has hauled a statue of the guy into her secret grotto (I have no idea how the hell Flounder got it in there), and starts TALKING to it. “What’s that, you say? Run away with you? Oh Eric you sly dog~ <3” and I realized how insane she was. Let me put this into perspective. She is talking to a statue of a man she has NEVER talked to before in her life, who she only met (if you can even call it that) YESTERDAY, and TALKING ABOUT RUNNING AWAY WITH HIM AND PROBABLY FUCKING THE SHIT OUT OF HIM
Ariel is batshit insane.

Then later in the movie she makes a bargain with the Sea Witch, who has been known to turn merpeople into little tiny withered plant creatures that probably live in agony every second of their tortured lives. She has 3 days to get this guy to give her “true love’s kiss” so she can be with him forever. What’s that, you say? Abandon my family and friends, and make a deal with a devil-octopus, all for a chance to get my TRUE LOVE’S COCK? SIGN ME UP =D

Maybe I shouldn’t be mad at Disney, maybe I should just be mad at the fairy tales. But, really.. is THIS what you want to show kids? THIS IS NOT HEALTHY BEHAVIOR. I mean, look at some of the other Disney princesses. Belle is like, an actual independent woman who takes TIME to get to know the dude she falls for. And, I don’t know if she counts as a “Disney Princess”, but Mulan is quite possibly the best female protagonist in any Disney movie ever. Those two are, you know, actual developed CHARACTERS, and not love-starved twits.

I’m gonna watch a good Disney movie, like The Lion King. Because Timon will sometimes–
Shiiiit.


Grayfawks’ Rants March 15, 2009

Posted by grayfawks in rants.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
2 comments

This will be a side project other to LPing. Agree, Disagree, stay neutral. This is just my opinion, and I’m not trying to change anyones minds on anything.

Grayfawks’ Rants 02: Game Naming

undying_screen042-copy

Now I know the title is a LITTLE misleading to what this is really about, but it’s the best thing my mind could come up with while being pressured by myself. This is my rant on game industries naming their games in a very stupid way. For a prime example I give you Clive Barker. I will just pick one name out of the dust from Clive Barker’s library. Clive Barker’s Undying by Clive Barker, Written by Clive Barker, Starring Clive Barker, Produced by Clive Barker, Played by Clive Barker etc. etc. You get the point. Clive Barker has slapped his name on to everything he has ever created or had anything to do with in any way, shape or form. To me this is a sign of massive egotism. For someone to slap their name on EVERYTHING. It’s like if I went around and demanded that every game company slap my name in the title because I played their game. This doesn’t bother me as much as regenerating health, mainly because there aren’t that many game designers who go this stupid route of egotism. In my opinion, you must have an ego so large that, while having sex, you imagine yourself rubbing your hand up your own leg. That’s right, almost like you have a twin.

Clive Barker isn’t the only offender though, and while Clive Barker’s games have been getting crappier and crappier as time goes by, this mans games have been quite good from memory. Tom Clancy, inventor of the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six series, a PROPER squad based, realistic FPS, not like a certain other game (Clive Barker’s Jericho). I will admit I enjoy the rainbow six series a lot, but still, he is another culprit of the “I must slap my name on EVERYTHING!” syndrome. we have Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six, Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon, Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell (splinter cell being a good stealth based action game). Now really, if you think about it, slapping your name on every game is totally un-needed. How about this, do what game developers do. Instead of slapping your name in the title like some cheap C-grade movie slaps a famous directors name in the title to get views, put a logo before the beginning movie that states your name or something along those lines. Game developers aren’t so egotistical that you can see their name in the title. Do we see Eidos’ Legacy of Kain? No! We see Legacy of Kain: Defiance as an example. How do we know it’s by Eidos? Before the first movie starts Eidos flashes on screen, informing us that the game was made by them. Why can’t Clive Barker and Tom Clancy do this? Do they touch themselves to the thoughts of how many households contain their brand name games? Your guess is as good as mine. This has been Grayfawks’ Rants, by Grayfawks, written by Grayfawks, starring Grayfawks.