The Big Picture: Junk Drawer Rises

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

omegawyrm:

stueymon:
Also, Batman is the only interesting DC character, the rest are Demi-gods walking amongst mere mortals, Over-powered fantasy characters that even the Bat himself falls prey too in "Being able to plan for everything" trap.

Yes, I prefer Marvel characters, they have tend to have a Set power, and stick to it.

(note, I'm not massively into comics so I don't have a ton of lore, just working off what I've seen)

Uh, I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure DC has a TON of non-powered characters. Wildcat, Green Arrow, Huntress, the entire bat-family, Shining Knight, and Manhunter just off the top of my head. And that's not even counting "suit" characters.

You are correct, there are tons of people that have limited powers and are even entirely human. The "power" difference between the two universes isn't really even existent. In fact the Marvel universe arguable has more powerful characters but they tend to have even more powerful villains/non-heroes. Galactus, The Beyonder, Kubik, Apocalypse, Celestials, Phoenix Force, Infinity Gauntlet, and many others are far more powerful than what is common in the DC universe. That isn't to say there aren't rediciously powerful beings in the DC universe (Spectre, Lucifer, Nekron, Anti-Monitor, and so forth). The problem is in how they are portrayed and who has the spotlight. Superman would be somewhere around Thor's power-level in the Marvel universe I suspect. Just with a bit more utility.

Am I the only one that noticed that it's the first time both, Pixar and Disney, change their main characters... eh... anatomy? I mean, ALL of Pixar's protagonists, up to date, are male while Disney's roaster is saturated with princesses.

NinjaDeathSlap:

Wargamer:
[quote="NinjaDeathSlap" post="6.378404.14794571"]Well perhaps there are people out there who would consider "A triple-barrel gatling gun where each barrel is a six-barrel minigun" for example, to be the ludicrous, over designed bastard child of a frustrated and immature developer with a compensation complex, rather than entertaining. Just sayin'.

Let's just assume for a moment that I don't really care about modern guns (which I don't). Most FPS games have such boring, boring, BORING weapons. Not just in terms of what they do, but in terms of how they look. Watching modern shooter videos it gets hard to tell what game you're watching, let alone what everyone is armed with.

Can you honestly tell me that you're going to confuse and triple-linked minigun with any other weapon on the battlefield? No you are not! You are going to see that weapon and think "Oh shit he's got a Minigun On Steroids!"

Even from the player's perspective, that kind of design is welcome. Yes, it might function mechanically much like the M3&3/4 assault rifle, but visually you have a very distinct firing firing animation as all three sets of barrels rotate on their own axis, and then rotate around each other as well.

All I can hear in my head when I think of that is Heavy from TF2 shouting, "It is Coward Killing Time!"

As much as I respect and enjoy your content Bob, I don't think you are really in the type of profession in which you are allowed to seriously complain about being under stress. I'm not saying what you do it easy (of course not), but there are many people who have it plenty worse.

But more on the topic in hand, I agree there's been too much Batman recently. For a while now I've gotten kind of bored with everyone talking about Batman as if he's Chuck Norris, and comparing every single car that looks the slightest bit menacing to being the Batmobile. Batman is good, but you can have too much of a good thing.

And on the subject of Wreck-it Ralph, am I the only one with a sneaking suspicion that we have already seen pretty much all the cameos of the entire movie?

Zangeif has been established as a Bison henchman in at least some Street Fighter adaptations (and not just for being a total moron like in the live action film.) Specifcally the Street Fighter 2 V anime series. Not a great show unless you're looking for an example of the abuse of reusing stock footage.

Wreck it Ralph looks like my wet dream, but I dread having to expalin refrences to friends. I also fear it may feel incomplete without at least some refrence to Kingdom Hearts. I'd better see a keyblade in there somewhere.

Mario: platformers have an innovation edge due to the nature of the game. Name a dozen platformers and you can easially get a dozen different playstyles, rules, and feels. Shooters, not so much. Sports, even less. Still, I'm willing to indulge for a while.

Django: I hate Tarentino so I'll pass.

Brave: pixar can be more style than substanceat times, but at least they get the style right.

Arrow: hoping for a life shorter than Birds of Prey. (a show that proves not everything connected to batman is gold)

Batman: I'll paraphrase Jim Sterling, it's not we have too much Batman, it's that the rest of DC can't catch a break. I'm torn between asking Rocksteady to do Batman Beyond for an Arkham City follow up, or asking what they can to for Superman.

Navvan:

omegawyrm:

stueymon:
Also, Batman is the only interesting DC character, the rest are Demi-gods walking amongst mere mortals, Over-powered fantasy characters that even the Bat himself falls prey too in "Being able to plan for everything" trap.

Yes, I prefer Marvel characters, they have tend to have a Set power, and stick to it.

(note, I'm not massively into comics so I don't have a ton of lore, just working off what I've seen)

Uh, I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure DC has a TON of non-powered characters. Wildcat, Green Arrow, Huntress, the entire bat-family, Shining Knight, and Manhunter just off the top of my head. And that's not even counting "suit" characters.

You are correct, there are tons of people that have limited powers and are even entirely human. The "power" difference between the two universes isn't really even existent. In fact the Marvel universe arguable has more powerful characters but they tend to have even more powerful villains/non-heroes. Galactus, The Beyonder, Kubik, Apocalypse, Celestials, Phoenix Force, Infinity Gauntlet, and many others are far more powerful than what is common in the DC universe. That isn't to say there aren't rediciously powerful beings in the DC universe (Spectre, Lucifer, Nekron, Anti-Monitor, and so forth). The problem is in how they are portrayed and who has the spotlight. Superman would be somewhere around Thor's power-level in the Marvel universe I suspect. Just with a bit more utility.

The Big Difference is that Marvel's characters tend to have flaws that limit them more than DC's characters do. Thor, at least in the comics, was limited to a truly human form (with a limp, no less). He wasn't playing at being human, he was human. Whereas Superman just puts on a suit and wears glasses. Spiderman had a truly crappy personal life- he had a complete life of suck where he could do nothing right, not to mention being responsible for his own Uncle's death by not stopping the guy who actually went out and killed him, even though he could have. Batman was a child when his parents got killed. What could he have done to prevent it? I am not saying DC heroes are without personal flaws (although some certainly are, Superman for one), but the Marvel heroes have larger and more limiting ones. That was Stan Lee's big contribution to the genre, that the heroes are more heroic when overcoming personal limitations that actually do limit them in some way.

saintdane05:
NO! THERE CAN NEVER BE ENOUGH BATMAN!!!!!!!!

exactly!!!

So, is "Arrow" going to be an actual thing? Or is it going to quietly go the way of the Aquaman series of a few years ago?

Capcha: once upon a time

Bob, is sounds like you need to take some sort of vacation. Although I do enjoy these 'Junk Drawer' episodes.

Also, we need a Batman FPS zombie casual video game based off of a movie by Michael Bay, then we would have enough of him.

<_< I never thought of Zangief as a villain either. No saint, just a strong man there to fight and win.

To be fair, several of the official SF tv shows have depicted Zangief as a henchman for Bison, doing bad deeds and fighting the good guys.

I actually wish for to see more Superman. Smallvile started off meaning well but ended in disaster with everyone thinking thank god its over...Take that back I dont want to see superman or any of the main staples of DC. I want blue beetle to have a show as well as a reboot version of aquaman and Flash

LadyRhian:

Navvan:

omegawyrm:

Uh, I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure DC has a TON of non-powered characters. Wildcat, Green Arrow, Huntress, the entire bat-family, Shining Knight, and Manhunter just off the top of my head. And that's not even counting "suit" characters.

You are correct, there are tons of people that have limited powers and are even entirely human. The "power" difference between the two universes isn't really even existent. In fact the Marvel universe arguable has more powerful characters but they tend to have even more powerful villains/non-heroes. Galactus, The Beyonder, Kubik, Apocalypse, Celestials, Phoenix Force, Infinity Gauntlet, and many others are far more powerful than what is common in the DC universe. That isn't to say there aren't rediciously powerful beings in the DC universe (Spectre, Lucifer, Nekron, Anti-Monitor, and so forth). The problem is in how they are portrayed and who has the spotlight. Superman would be somewhere around Thor's power-level in the Marvel universe I suspect. Just with a bit more utility.

The Big Difference is that Marvel's characters tend to have flaws that limit them more than DC's characters do. Thor, at least in the comics, was limited to a truly human form (with a limp, no less). He wasn't playing at being human, he was human. Whereas Superman just puts on a suit and wears glasses. Spiderman had a truly crappy personal life- he had a complete life of suck where he could do nothing right, not to mention being responsible for his own Uncle's death by not stopping the guy who actually went out and killed him, even though he could have. Batman was a child when his parents got killed. What could he have done to prevent it? I am not saying DC heroes are without personal flaws (although some certainly are, Superman for one), but the Marvel heroes have larger and more limiting ones. That was Stan Lee's big contribution to the genre, that the heroes are more heroic when overcoming personal limitations that actually do limit them in some way.

This person speaks the truth. I suppose I should have expanded upon the statement "...how they are portrayed and who has the spotlight" as it was left rather vague. There are plenty of people within the DC universe that are actually flawed/limited/interesting/well characterized or however you want to put it. Sadly they often aren't in the spotlight. Likewise characters like Superman could be portrayed as having flaws without sacrificing what makes the character who they are. On occasion they are portrayed that way, and incidentally those tend to be the most well received stories whether or not they are canon. It just isn't the case most of the time.

In my original post I merely wanted to point out the "Demi-Gods amongst men" statement wasn't really any different between universes.

I'm amazed that everyone is so excited over Wreck it Ralph, the trailer looked cool, but really, you are that easily satisfied over Bowser, Zangief, and the Pac-Man ghost? I'm sorry but it just seems way to geeky to obsess over it. The movie does look good however.

Mario innovates? Well a little I suppose. Maybe if COD was to slow down it's production cycle and do only one to two games per console it would "innovate" as much as Mario.

Batman is overused, and I do hate this inane "Batman can beat anyone with prep time" arguments people produce as it's just silly. Still he has produced two great games and movies recently so I let him off the hook.

LadyRhian:

Navvan:

omegawyrm:

Uh, I could be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure DC has a TON of non-powered characters. Wildcat, Green Arrow, Huntress, the entire bat-family, Shining Knight, and Manhunter just off the top of my head. And that's not even counting "suit" characters.

You are correct, there are tons of people that have limited powers and are even entirely human. The "power" difference between the two universes isn't really even existent. In fact the Marvel universe arguable has more powerful characters but they tend to have even more powerful villains/non-heroes. Galactus, The Beyonder, Kubik, Apocalypse, Celestials, Phoenix Force, Infinity Gauntlet, and many others are far more powerful than what is common in the DC universe. That isn't to say there aren't rediciously powerful beings in the DC universe (Spectre, Lucifer, Nekron, Anti-Monitor, and so forth). The problem is in how they are portrayed and who has the spotlight. Superman would be somewhere around Thor's power-level in the Marvel universe I suspect. Just with a bit more utility.

The Big Difference is that Marvel's characters tend to have flaws that limit them more than DC's characters do. Thor, at least in the comics, was limited to a truly human form (with a limp, no less). He wasn't playing at being human, he was human. Whereas Superman just puts on a suit and wears glasses. Spiderman had a truly crappy personal life- he had a complete life of suck where he could do nothing right, not to mention being responsible for his own Uncle's death by not stopping the guy who actually went out and killed him, even though he could have. Batman was a child when his parents got killed. What could he have done to prevent it? I am not saying DC heroes are without personal flaws (although some certainly are, Superman for one), but the Marvel heroes have larger and more limiting ones. That was Stan Lee's big contribution to the genre, that the heroes are more heroic when overcoming personal limitations that actually do limit them in some way.

I'm not the biggest comic book fan but I thought there was a general philsophical trend that Marvel would make characters you would relate to while DC would make characters that you would look up to an be inspired by. And part of the knock on effect of that was that Marvel superheroes tended to be less powerful then their DC counterparts.

The Ralph movie looks like a blast, if not a decent movie. Can't wait to see who is in it.

Brave. Oh I don't know about that. A good positive girl movie, but per-enlightened patriarchal? I'm laughing at that idea right there. You can't really impose an idea of iron will patriarchy when every male in the movie is a blubbering idiot, including the King.

Batman.. oh man. I am not a bit fan of Batman, but maybe when something churns out later on to be crap, and that continues as a trend, then we are done with Batman. Batman is still going to milk properly because people like Batman. When he begins to suck, the idiots will cry it out, and thus less of a profit.

I was never really much into the batman to begin with but i can see the hype as getting a little old now. As for Django, id only have a problem with it if it painted all white people as slave owners and as being evil simply for the fact they are white.... be honest i don't think it will do that but there will be a problem if it dose, racism run both ways.

as for brave.... well.... id be here all day. So ill just let Girlwriteswhat say it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEeCCuFFO8&feature=g-all-c

WIR: People actually are bothered by that. For serious? It's a minor expository point that features a smattering of characters from some of the biggest franchises in gaming history and people are complaining about Zangief saying he's a bad guy. My God, if he had a British accent I would understand, but seriously; even Plinkett would let that kind of shit go.

Mario: Almost agree. I think the Mario titles have been pretty innovative in their runs. You've got Super Mario Bros., Mario Kart, Yoshi's Island, Mario 64/Mario Galaxy style, Super Mario RPG, And Mario Sunshine... that's certainly more variety than Fifa or Madden or CoD have offered....combined. Now I don't mind revisiting the old formula once in a while, indeed it is reinvigorating to play the platformer your inner child remembers furnished with the amenities the modern gamer craves - but remember Bob; you've made this argument before on GO a long time ago. If you keep having to repeat that argument, maybe it's starting to get a tad stale regardless of what CoD is doing?

Django: Another Tarantino revenge fantasy...eh.

Brave: Look at you with your Film 101 analysis. Are we really that excited about that? Seems pretty standard symbolism fare. Don't get me wrong: I agree Pixar is the balls, I don't know of any other studio that actually made me care about two machines in love, but dress ripping is the least I expect from them.

Batman: There is never enough.

Funny you should ask if there was maybe enough Batman. I recently wrote an essay on how Batman is dead and we need to let him rest in peace. Even posted it on this site.

In my opinion the real difference between Call of Duty and Mario is the number of copy cats. There's a dozen different games you can pick right now that gives you a similar experience to a Call of Duty. Mario on the other hand, while the situation has improved a bit with the rise of indy development if Nintendo stopped making Mario or Zelda then for those of us that like these types of games what else is there to play? Occasionally you'll get games like Okami or Little Big Planet, but overall the pickings are pretty slim.

Note this doesn't apply to EA sports games. Yes they deserve criticism for not innovating that much from year to year and still charging full price, but while from a gamers perspective simply getting a roster update isn't a big deal from a sports fans perspective yes it does actually matter a lot. I haven't played an EA sports game in years so I'm saying this as a huge hockey fan.

The ideal consumer friendly model would be to take the proper development cycle with these sports games, where it may take 2-3 years to develop a full game that you release at full price. In the meantime, at the start of each new season you release a roster and ratings update pack DLC for $10-20. But that's just in an ideal world. If sports/gamer fans are willing to spend $60 every year for a new release with modest improvements, same way Call of Duty fans do, then EA isn't going to stop doing what makes them money.

Sagat isn't a bad guy either. Just so you know. His student, on the other hand...

saintdane05:
NO! THERE CAN NEVER BE ENOUGH BATMAN!!!!!!!!

Exactly this

well, there hasn't been a great batman television series since the 90's, there hasn't been a statue of him built in any major metropolis, and there aren't actual rich playboys dressing up fighting crime at night inspired by the franchise, so i'd so on the whole, no. there is not enough batman.

NinjaDeathSlap:
Well perhaps there are people out there who would consider "A triple-barrel gatling gun where each barrel is a six-barrel minigun" for example, to be the ludicrous, over designed bastard child of a frustrated and immature developer with a compensation complex, rather than entertaining. Just sayin'.

The only part of this I disagree with is the "rather than". XD

Sis:
Haven't we reached the point where maybe, just maybe, we've seen enough Mario for a while?

May be we have too much of both Batman and Mario....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BCWoQmpBRA&feature=related

As for Zangief being a bad guy, he is a villain or hero depending what country you come from. In his native land he's their super soldier. The Epitome of what Russia has always strived to be, the tough as nails powerhouse that keeps fighting regardless of the foe or how badly they've been hurt.In the Xmen Vs Street fighter, he bravely teams up with Collosus to liberate Russia from Omega Red for his ending. Even in Street Fighter the movie he is just a big oaf who happens get swept up in the wake of a charmismatic mad man's mania, but immediately turns face from heel moment he sees Bison's true colors. Deep down he's trying always be the people's champion...just it might not be your people he's championing heh. Ultimately as Bob said, we have a room full of awesome game characters cameoing together ,even if this were so off base..... the scene is overall too awesome to care. I'll live if that's all they got wrong.

I am cool with retro games coming out. Honestly 2D platforming is a perfected art. Why wouldn't you want to see someone pull their best material out from time to time? In case of Mario , megaman, and other old school characters , they re still very much the minority of what gets made nowdays. Unless we start seeing multiple new 2D mario games a year for a coupel years straight, then yeah they re jumping the shark then. Right now it's been long enough since the last that I have no complaints.

I don't think any franchise should come out yearly.Make one kick ass game(don't leave anything on the table for DLC or a amped up addition 6 months later...yes you capcom.), then go away awhile. Let me fully devour the previous offering, and let me miss you for awhile. When games start making too many versions, I start skipping versions then. And after a point I stop being interested all together. No series evolves fast enough to justify constantly making games at a yearly pace for multiple years straight.

I always thought the argument that sports games don't innovate enough to be incredibly uninformed. I'm not saying that they do innovate alot, I'm just saying that innovation isn't really the point of those games. In fact needless innovation can break the often very fragile game balance.

I buy PES (Pro Evolution Soccer) every year not because I expect these huge innovations, but because I want to play with my favourite players in my favourite teams with updated rosters, match kits etc and a few tweaks that will hopefully make this years edition slightly better than last years. With a sport such as Hockey, that I am not as invested in, I will make do with last years version or even older. But for football (soccer), that I follow incredibly closely, playing last years version will just feel horribly outdated.
I don't really see the problem in this. But then again I don't really see the problem with people enjoying annual editions of CoD either, even though I personally don't care for those games.

In this order:
-Seeing Bowser, Zangief and Robotnik in the same shot is already worth the price of admission.
-Amen to the Nintendo sentiment. I mean, say what you will about Mario being over-exposed, at least he's in a wide number of genres. He's in platformers, racing games, sports games, puzzle games, fighting games, party games, RPGs, adventure games, he's even been in a few educational games. I think if anyone has the right to be in re-ups of retro revival throwbacks, it's Mario.
-I for one welcome the wave of angry, racist commentary that will follow in the wake of Django Unchained and shall laugh at their outdated ideals.
-Pixar: We're better at visual storytelling than you. And we know it!
-I'm going to say something that will probably be controversial. Justice League Unlimited was probably the last time the DC Universe was anything resembling good. Now before anyone jumps down my throat, I love The Dark Knight, but again, the stigma of "Warner Brothers can only do things right when it comes to Batman, and even then it's severely watered down," still exists for a reason. I mean, did you see that atrocious Green Lantern movie? Of course not, because you are smart. With any luck, Green Arrow (because I refuse to refer to it as Arrow) will be good, but I somehow doubt it. Also, Deathstroke will not be the factor that makes this show worth a damn, I'm sorry. Maybe it's because I've never read anything concerning the character, but the presence of Deathstroke does not enthrall me at all. Yeah he was kind of cool in the animated Teen Titans show, buteven then he had his problems.
-Yes. There's been too much Batman. Especially the gritty, Frank Miller-inspired Batman. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but I miss the 1960s-era Adam West Batman.

Still a weak argument for Mario there. The Super Mario series hadn't innovated 9 years after its creation any more than Call Of Duty has 9 years after its own. In both cases, they've just released nearly the same game with better graphics and some new mechanics. Some have been much more so then others (Super Mario World to Call of Duty 4).

370999:
I'm amazed that everyone is so excited over Wreck it Ralph, the trailer looked cool, but really, you are that easily satisfied over Bowser, Zangief, and the Pac-Man ghost? I'm sorry but it just seems way to geeky to obsess over it. The movie does look good however.

Concerning Mario and CoD: I don't actually think the Mario series is measurably more inventive than CoD in recent years. This is coming from a guy who loves Mario and thinks CoD is at best worth borrowing. Mario gets new power-ups, CoD gets new perks. Same thing with the yearly sports games, though I'm pretty convinced that the yearly release schedule is a bad thing since it disallows them time to learn from the previous title before releasing the next one. So I guess that's one way Mario is better, for now.

I'm mostly talking about the New Super Mario Bros. sub-series by the way, and I guess this can be applied to the Super Mario Galaxy sub-series as well. In fact every Mario sub-series is like this except Super Mario World.

Wreck It Ralph is Nintendo, Capcom, and Segas BEST MARKETING PLAN EVER.

I bet Disney approached Capcom with a Pitch. Capcom then said "wait one min". Called up all their friends then Black-Mailed Disney for the November 2nd Release Date with. You can have movie rights for all our characters for this film form all of us If it is released in "this" week.

Ubisoft has a launch title for October 30
Disney has Wreck-it Ralph for November 2
The Wii U has to be release within 1 - 2 weeks of Oct 30 for the Ubisoft date to work.

This cannot be a coincidence.
Best Plan Ever

You know who would make a great protagonist for a movie/game/cartoon show but will probably never get one, at least not in the near future?

The Flash.

Take all that stuff from the second Sonic In Crisis episode of the Game Overthinker, about the game being about a guy who goes fast as opposed to just being about going fast, plop it right on top of The Flash (who, let's be honest here, has a considerably more likable personality than the spiky blue hedgehog), and you've got a great video game just begging to be made. Super speed done well + snappy dialogue and likable characters is a winning combination in any medium.

I just realized that the Wreck it Ralph trailer has a character that looks an awful lot like Kano in it...

I'm honestly shocked- that the coolest movie is coming out in favor of gamers which can change how movies roll (literally) and all people can talk about (in this case, nit pick) is how Zangief isn't a bad guy.

Come now guys, does it matter? I know he isn't evil nor a villain- but look at our main protagonist of Wreck-It-Ralph. He isn't evil nor a bad guy ether yet he does fill in as the antagonist of the game he stars in so that's why he is considered bad, not evil but the role of bad guy. See?

OT: I've seen some good stuff from Batman and until I find him repulsive- all the more power to Batman games and movies. Besides, our generation is focusing on super heroes being the prime entertainment for movies/games/ect. and for that I approve especially if it stars the most interesting character which is Batman.

LadyRhian:
The Big Difference is that Marvel's characters tend to have flaws that limit them more than DC's characters do. Thor, at least in the comics, was limited to a truly human form (with a limp, no less). He wasn't playing at being human, he was human. Whereas Superman just puts on a suit and wears glasses. Spiderman had a truly crappy personal life- he had a complete life of suck where he could do nothing right, not to mention being responsible for his own Uncle's death by not stopping the guy who actually went out and killed him, even though he could have. Batman was a child when his parents got killed. What could he have done to prevent it? I am not saying DC heroes are without personal flaws (although some certainly are, Superman for one), but the Marvel heroes have larger and more limiting ones. That was Stan Lee's big contribution to the genre, that the heroes are more heroic when overcoming personal limitations that actually do limit them in some way.

To quote the Joker in Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker:

I always think it adds resonance to a hero's mission to have some defining element of tragedy in his background, don't you?

And I happen to agree. Not so much about tragedy in it's fullest, but but character flaws add depth to a character.

saintdane05:
NO! THERE CAN NEVER BE ENOUGH BATMAN!!!!!!!!

Who? Oh him. Sorry, I was distracted buying my ninth ticket to go see The Avengers. *Smirk*

OT: Zangief isn't a villain. I don't think he even was in SFII, he was just a national hero in the Soviet Union and in the more recent games he's a mildly comical character who's goal is just to prove his strength. He's got a huge fanbase of children whom he dutifully fights for, even going so far to take a picture of himself holding the final boss of one game in a headlock so his fans can see him doing good deeds.

Hell, even SAGAT is something of a good guy now, having given up his vendetta with Ryu and learning that fighting isn't about victory but about improving yourself. He returns home (where he's still a national hero and icon) where children are glad to see him and he reflects on how he "met an old friend" (implied to be Ryu) during the course of the game. That's actually a pretty interesting character arch to take Sagat in. He's regained his pride but more than that he's found a new outlook on life that's given him a sense of peace. It's pretty amazing to see that in a fighting game.

I don't mind though because even Wreck-It Ralph doesn't make him into much of a bad guy, like any wrestling character he was introduced as something of a heel (the way WWE wrestlers can go back and forth between fan-favorite and love-to-hate personas).

Anyways. Bob? Stop over-defining the archery scene in Brave. Princesses not wanting to be princesses isn't anything new and corsets aren't actually designed to constrict a woman. They're just for support. Believe me, I have a girlfriend who enjoys wearing them and she never has trouble breathing or moving.

Sis:
Haven't we reached the point where maybe, just maybe, we've seen enough Mario for a while?

As Yahtzee said in his Spore review: Short answer: No.
Long answer; NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Sis:
Haven't we reached the point where maybe, just maybe, we've seen enough Mario for a while?

HA HAHA HAHAHAhahAHahA it is funny cause it's true :P

I love a good mario game here and again but Nintendo doesn't go a year without a new Mario game fact is he is just that thing they use when they got nothing these days.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here