Spring RTS Engine

Just to be cryptic, I shall only say this: "Bring Dramamine. Lots and lots of Dramamine."

Oh right. Yesterday was the 18th, wasn't it...

what

Zoombie wrote:Just to be cryptic, I shall only say this: "Bring Dramamine. Lots and lots of Dramamine."

Eh, I didn't think it was that bad.

What is dramamine?

manored wrote:What is dramamine?

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=define%3Adramamine

"A medicine used to prevent motion sickness, especially seasickness"

I herd we do not get to see the monstar.

Really, when I saw the preview I thought it was a sequel to Godzilla vs. Mothra. Is it worth to pirate?

To answer questions:

The shaky cam caused 7 people in my theater to run out of said theater and throw up in the lobby. I didn't find it that bad either, but still.

The movie is not a sequel to any kind of Godzilla anything. The only similarities is there is something big and it attacks New York. AS for it's quality, well, some of my friends hated it, some of them loved it. I know I loved it and thought it was a fantastic movie.

You see enough of the monster to give you a vivid image in your head of what it looks like. And it looks coooooool.

Spoiler: Looks like a cross between the really big Gears of War monster, a spider, and some kind of...thing. The camera man see's it for about 10 whole seconds while it stands above him...right before he gets eaten. See, now this whole bit has been ruined just cause you had to ignore the spoiler tag. I hope you're proud of yourself!

i fucking hate shaky cam

i fucking hate it and i hate any movie that uses the shit out of it

Me too, I usually like to identify a suficient number of things that aparear on the screen to be able to understand whats going on... :)

Normally I also hate shaky cam buuuut they use it very well in this film. I mean, the shaky cam isn't just for shits and giggles. It's actually in context and therefore I like it.

That make sense?

A shaky cam can ruin a good movie. Man on Fire is a prime example IIRC.

It's really a love it or hate it kind of movie. I liked it a lot though. Quite a few scenes get your heart pumping.

Shakycam reminds me of the bloom graphics effect. It's good when used properly, but whore whore whore whore bitch bitch bitch I hate hollywood and sensationalist "we gotta have x-treme graffix YO WHUT UP HOMIES ROLL ME A FAT BLUNT YO YO YO YO YO YO NAWWWW YO HELL NAWW YO" smells like ghey goddammit I hate hollywood, I hate hollywood so much. I can't sit down to watch a ******* movie anymore without knowing the ending within 30 seconds because of the dumbed-down storytelling. "he's going to die for sure", "she'll die gruesomely and motivate the hero" "she'll be the hero's shoulder to cry on" "his dad's a war veteran so there's going to be a flashback to his pa talking about the war, and that'll motivate him to bankai or something" HOLY CRAP.

"Well let's just hope [miscellaneous enemy] doesn't figure out that our back door is unlocked for massive damage" 2 hours of drama later "HOLY CRAP THEY FOUND THE BACK DOOR IMPOSSIBLE NOOOOOO"

Why must everything be dumbed down for the lowest common denominator? Why must everything be about profit? What happened to art? I'll tell you what happened. Assholes happened. Some clownasshatseatskater wants to buy another golf course so he only lets his studio make movies that the 70% of people who need to be spoon-fed a story for them to get it. Then you get companies like Valve or Stardock, who publish themselves and therefore get more than 5% of the proceeds, and they never do any wrong because they haven't got a two-bit liberal arts graduate manager with a mop up his ass telling them "what the public wants to see."

Think about this: If I charged $5 for every copy of AA that was downloaded on the most recent non-garbage version, I would be able to live comfortably for about 2 years and still have more spending money than I do now, without actually having a job. I'd have made $100,000 or more. I'm not saying that I'd do this or that I legally could, it's just an example. I'm saying that this is the ridiculous scale of ripoff that's going on. A game developer sees at most about 5% of the proceeds of their game. That's less than $3 a copy for an average title - and that's for a real genuine work of art, something far beyond anything I could ever hope to accomplish, yet they get far less and have 50 or more developers to pay with that money.

It's the same situation with music, and that's why all we've got are hipster doofus rappers and emo on the radio - that's what the majority of people want to hear, or at least that's what the executives have decided, since that garbage can be produced a dime a dozen. So they pay paris hilton or whoever the slutwhore of the week is to wear a shirt that promotes that band and now you've got 50 hopelessly-in-need-of-purpose teenagers buying that crap. The only way for an artist to make money is to go on tour, and that's why you've got so many of them saying "who the hell cares" about piracy. Or you've got Radiohead saying, name your price or even take our album for free. Anything they actually make is just gravy in those situations, since it's pennies compared to ticket sales.

Gonna have a fury breakdown or something, so I'm going to bed. In case you're wondering I just tried to watch a movie and had to leave 10 minutes into it because it was so cliche. Then I asked my friend, so how did it end, and sure enough I was right down to the last detail. From 10 minutes!

This is the reason I started watching international tv and movies about 3 years ago. They've got the same problem, ie, re-used common storytelling devices, but they generally have an entirely different set of them for each country.. to some extent anyway. Just like domestic TV, 99% of international stuff is garbage, but at least that final 1% has something interesting to offer. Want something original, try Run Lola Run. Never seen anything like that before. Even if it wasn't AWESOMEGREAT, it was genuinely strange and above all DIFFERENT. Plus I learned some German swear words.

...

Regardless I hope the movie is something like The Day After Tomorrow, only without the wolves, romantic subplot, father-son subplot, and generally the entire movie except that scene with the tornadoes. That scene was boss.

This might sound silly, but Cloverfeild made a lot more sense and I believed it a lot more than The Day After Tomorrow.

Strange, isn't it? But a giant monster coming out of the Atlantic and attacking New York is more believable to me than global warming causing the world to freeze.

BUT I READ IN POPULAR SCIENCE IT MAKES SENSE

Crazy talk.

Also, the characterization in TDAT didn't work as well as the characterization in Cloverfeild.

The idea is, the atmosphere heats up, melts the northern ice, and without that source of cold the water... something about tides... atmosphere... icy death. It does actually make scientific sense apparently, although it wouldn't happen in a matter of hours or even days. It could happen in a matter of years though, and it wouldn't be possible to reverse in time for anything to be done about it.

It was at one point considered possible for global warming to cause a temperature drop in the northern hemisphere.

It is not still considered possible.

And the hurricanes over continents were laughably stupid.