|
On September 23 2015 09:55 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 09:45 Gahlo wrote:
Because people, including you, were discussing how people interact with a game that doesn't have any built in lore that effects the game and how it would be stupid to build lore when most people don't care. Fact is that League had lore, even if it was just a trumped up version of "kid playing with his toys" from Smash Bros when it was a small time game.
Nobody was arguing that lore is "stupid to build". But in terms of how the game is marketed with respect to the information that Blizzard is currently making available and how it affects my interest level in the game, lore's importance is near-zero because for a game that I have yet to play, my first thought is whether the game is fun to play or not. Telling me the game's lore without telling me anything about what the game is like to play first has no real meaning to me, *especially* for a competitive multiplayer game. For a single-player game, the story is directly an element of the gameplay so it contributes to how fun the game itself is to play so marketing the game on story elements over gameplay mechanics is more understandable. Is strong, well-built lore critical to making the game a successful final product? Absolutely. Is it what I want to hear about if I know nothing about the game and want information to set my hype level for it? Not really. For initial hype, there's really one singular question that actually matters, which is "does this game look fun to play?" Everything else is fluff. I don't see why that's a weird or outrageous idea.
Because that is what you are looking for first and foremost. You don't value the lore so you don't put any priority on it. If we were to look at SC2, it didn't matter to you that Raynor was trying to collect the pieces to the Zelnaga doodad to fulfill a prophecy because when it came down to it you just wanted to know how the new units were and how the paradigm shift to MBS and automine would change the game.
However, with a brand new IP new players aren't looking at "How is this game different than the previous one?" The quickest way to get new players to a new IP is to give them a hook to play the game. That's why the announcement trailer was entirely lore. This is a memorial to team awesome buddies. Oh no bad dudes introduced breaking into memorial place! Sweet, team awesome buddies coming to stop bad dude's nefarious schemes! All while showcasing a cinematic version of their kits. I quite clearly remember Soniv eating that shit up. Does he know that it's fun or not? No. But the important thing is that the video along with the short gameplay shown made him want to find out.
I highlighted the bold part because it really all comes down to that. To you. The way Blizzard has chose to market this game doesn't appeal to you because they are not trying to appeal to your sensibilities. On the other hand it works for people like Soniv. I'm willing to bet that the way that they are marketing the game appeals to the majority and that it is you who is in fact in the minority here.
|
On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf.
Netflix totally wurf. I don't even watch regular TV aside from a handful of series that I record.
|
On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf.
I really enjoyed Sense8. The main characters provide a pretty diverse set of protagonists that allows pretty much everybody to find some one to identify with.
|
United States23745 Posts
Rivals of Aether went into early access today. Sure looks a lot like Smash. Probably better than Smash 4 
|
On September 23 2015 10:58 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf. Netflix totally wurf. I don't even watch regular TV aside from a handful of series that I record.
People repeat this waayyyy too often. Netflix isn't for everyone, and I don't honestly believe they update with enough variety to be worth.
On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf.
Sense8 is pretty cool. It has potential for their characters to be engaging. There are some pretty amazing visual shots, which makes up for some of the pacing issues. I hope the second season is a lot better.
Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means.
|
On September 23 2015 11:19 onlywonderboy wrote:Rivals of Aether went into early access today. Sure looks a lot like Smash. Probably better than Smash 4
Looks like a simpler brawl+. Why in world would you remove teching?
|
United States23745 Posts
On September 23 2015 11:30 ketchup wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 10:58 Requizen wrote:On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf. Netflix totally wurf. I don't even watch regular TV aside from a handful of series that I record. People repeat this waayyyy too often. Netflix isn't for everyone, and I don't honestly believe they update with enough variety to be worth. Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 10:31 Lord Tolkien wrote:
Question: anyone here seen Sense8 and can give me their review?
Been considering picking up Netflix to watch it but uh, not sure if wurf. Sense8 is pretty cool. It has potential for their characters to be engaging. There are some pretty amazing visual shots, which makes up for some of the pacing issues. I hope the second season is a lot better. Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means.
Luckily Netflix also has House of Cards, Bojack Horesman, Orange if the New Black, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt (in terms of original programming. I also heard their new show Narcos is really good). They get a lot of crap for not putting out enough new content, but if you've never had Netflix before it's easily worth paying for a few months and watching what you want. Then if you run out of content you can just stop paying.
|
Netflix also has Daredevil, which is so fucking worth.
The variety is straight up worth it for me. We've watched some Chinese flicks, some Euro things, we're binging Person of Interest, she loves Documentaries... Sure you can get all that through cable and OnDemand, but it's clunky and often behind further paywalls. I'm thinking of cutting Cable completely.
|
Daredevil was impressively awesome.
|
On September 23 2015 11:30 ketchup wrote:
Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means.
I'd agree with this, but also generally say that Netflix is a better deal than most anything else out there.
Also, I don't use Netflix, but do subscribe to the WWE Network, which costs more and only offers wrestling and wrestling accessories. I use it enough to feel good about the money spent, though.
|
United States23745 Posts
On September 23 2015 12:31 TheHumanSensation wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 11:30 ketchup wrote:
Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means. I'd agree with this, but also generally say that Netflix is a better deal than most anything else out there. Also, I don't use Netflix, but do subscribe to the WWE Network, which costs more and only offers wrestling and wrestling accessories. I use it enough to feel good about the money spent, though.
If you care enough to watch all the PPV stuff WWE Network seems like a no brainer.
|
On September 23 2015 12:38 onlywonderboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 12:31 TheHumanSensation wrote:On September 23 2015 11:30 ketchup wrote:
Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means. I'd agree with this, but also generally say that Netflix is a better deal than most anything else out there. Also, I don't use Netflix, but do subscribe to the WWE Network, which costs more and only offers wrestling and wrestling accessories. I use it enough to feel good about the money spent, though. If you care enough to watch all the PPV stuff WWE Network seems like a no brainer.
Oh god. My roommate got super into wrestling after Summer Slam because Amell did a celebrity match. Now he's been binge watching since 2014's Wrestlmania to catch up on recent storylines to better understand what's going on when he watches current stuff with a mutual friend.
It's the most bizzare instant infatuation with a topic I've ever seen.
|
The last tense few minutes of a eBay auction. MUST GET MODELS.
|
On September 23 2015 12:42 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 12:38 onlywonderboy wrote:On September 23 2015 12:31 TheHumanSensation wrote:On September 23 2015 11:30 ketchup wrote:
Really, I don't think Netflix is worth picking up just for one show. That applies for any show you want to watch on netflix. If you wanted just for one show, you are better off watching by other means. I'd agree with this, but also generally say that Netflix is a better deal than most anything else out there. Also, I don't use Netflix, but do subscribe to the WWE Network, which costs more and only offers wrestling and wrestling accessories. I use it enough to feel good about the money spent, though. If you care enough to watch all the PPV stuff WWE Network seems like a no brainer. Oh god. My roommate got super into wrestling after Summer Slam because Amell did a celebrity match. Now he's been binge watching since 2014's Wrestlmania to catch up on recent storylines to better understand what's going on when he watches current stuff with a mutual friend. It's the most bizzare instant infatuation with a topic I've ever seen.
As far as anectodal evidence goes, both me and one friend did exact same thing - randomly discovered wrestling (before this year all I knew about it was that "it's fake") and it instantly became one of the biggest hobbies (for me only League is bigger). Although I spent all year trying different promotions and from what I can tell it was pretty much the best time to get into wrestling (especially with Lucha Underground), I'm not sure how long would I last if I only watched WWE :p
Speaking of which, LUCHA UNDERGROUND IS GETTING SECOND SEASON HYPE
As far as WWE goes, Night of Champions was actually the first time since I started watching that I was really turned off from WWE. Like, I literally didn't care what happens next evening on Raw, or how the story will go, or anything really - I only watched Paige's, Natalya's and New Day's segments and I feel like that's all I want from WWE right now. On the other hand, I recently got really hooked with Pro Wrestling Guerrilla so catching up on that is currently the priority.
Also, I'm pretty sure even if you're a Network subscriber you still have to pay for PPVs? Or did that change and they were only refering to price of subscription with their "9.99" segments?
|
H's known about wreslting, he's casually watched it in the past. He is literally going through everything, not just pay per view. Ever Raw, every Smackdown, every wahtever else they do now.
|
Today in Business Intelligence:
approximating distance between two Latitude/Longitudes for use with GeoTagging
edit - shit, I'm actually getting pretty excited about this experiment
|
On September 23 2015 08:41 Eppa! wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 08:32 TheYango wrote:
WoW's actually a perfect example of what I described in a later post: where Blizzard got lucky and did something amazing initially, then proceeded to screw up and squander everything good about their game because they didn't have a solid grasp on WHY it was good. Vanilla was great for hard core crowd, and people that where ignorant (compared to how people are today) and all the shitty parts of the game where not an issue because people sucked. Endgame (strongest part of vanilla) was baaaaaaaaad in so many ways but the sense of exploration made people forget/gloss over it. If vanilla was released today it would have been seen as crap except for the hardcore fanatics that love 40 man.
"If X was released today it would be seen as crap" can be said of a lot of milestone games though.
TheYango isn't saying that Vanilla was perfect, but that Blizzard didn't understand the elements of their game which made it compelling. As Blizzard attempted to improve the game they proceeded to "fix" problems and nonproblems alike as a result of their ignorance.
|
On September 23 2015 22:30 jcarlsoniv wrote:
Today in Business Intelligence:
approximating distance between two Latitude/Longitudes for use with GeoTagging
edit - shit, I'm actually getting pretty excited about this experiment
Wouldn't you just do sqrt((La1-La2)*40k/360 + (Lo1-Lo2)*40k/360), as long as you take into account that if La1-La2 > 180, you invert them.
|
On September 23 2015 23:17 killerdog wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 22:30 jcarlsoniv wrote:
Today in Business Intelligence:
approximating distance between two Latitude/Longitudes for use with GeoTagging
edit - shit, I'm actually getting pretty excited about this experiment Wouldn't you just do sqrt((La1-La2)*40k/360 + (Lo1-Lo2)*40k/360), as long as you take into account that if La1-La2 > 180, you invert them.
I assumed it's only 2 points not 4 points. Either way you just create the vectors and do vector addition which'll give you the straight line vector between the points iirc. Been awhile since I've done simple vector calc lol. That's if the frame of reference is the same though. I assume it is with GeoTagging...
|
On September 23 2015 23:26 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 23:17 killerdog wrote:On September 23 2015 22:30 jcarlsoniv wrote:
Today in Business Intelligence:
approximating distance between two Latitude/Longitudes for use with GeoTagging
edit - shit, I'm actually getting pretty excited about this experiment Wouldn't you just do sqrt((La1-La2)*40k/360 + (Lo1-Lo2)*40k/360), as long as you take into account that if La1-La2 > 180, you invert them. I assumed it's only 2 points not 4 points. Either way you just create the vectors and do vector addition which'll give you the straight line vector between the points iirc. Been awhile since I've done simple vector calc lol. That's if the frame of reference is the same though. I assume it is with GeoTagging...
Every point has a latitude and a longtitude, so if you have two points you should have Latitude1Longitude1 and Latitude2Longitude2 no?
Shouldn't be necessary to do any more then that since by definition latitude and longitude are at a right angle to each other
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
