Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Bleac

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Manga Mausoleum / Re: Dark Horse Releases "Deluxe" Berserk Edition
« on: February 17, 2019, 10:55:18 PM »
Those are looking good. You must have a grand Berserk collection, I'm jealous.

Manga Mausoleum / Re: Dark Horse Releases "Deluxe" Berserk Edition
« on: February 15, 2019, 10:27:15 PM »
I'm willing to bet you're wrong. Same reason the covers are put together at the end of the volume and not inserted where they'd be relevant: more complicated (and therefore expensive) to do. And I'm not saying it would have cost millions, just that they weren't willing to do it.

Not doubting that it would have cost them more, but I bet they got a bit lazy as well and it wasn't strictly a cost efficiency decision. I could be wrong of course.

Manga Mausoleum / Re: Dark Horse Releases "Deluxe" Berserk Edition
« on: February 15, 2019, 08:08:55 PM »
I see two possibilities: the first is they didn't have access to them, the second is that they went for the cheaper option. My guess is #2.

I can't imagine that would've caused such a huge financial dent for them. I'm more inclined to believe that getting a hold of the original colored pages was more trouble than they were willing to put up with; and there's also a third possibility which is that they didn't even think or care about it in the first place.

Video Games / Re: Games to look forward to!
« on: February 15, 2019, 03:56:27 AM »

A new action RPG in the style of "I Am Setsuna" and "Lost Sphear". I like the music and ambiance, also the premise of the story could incorporate some interesting gameplay mechanics along with it.

Manga Mausoleum / Re: Dark Horse Releases "Deluxe" Berserk Edition
« on: February 14, 2019, 09:47:03 PM »
And sound effects were added, but the translation appears to be the same.

If they went over the sound effects but are not gonna bother at all with the, just thinking about it pisses me off. It would be a shame, because this edition looks good otherwise.

Berserk Miscellaneous / Re: Is there a black and white print of this image?
« on: February 08, 2019, 07:44:33 PM »
There is no official black and white colouring of this image out there, but you can easily add a black and white filter on top of it. Here are some examples I did using the basic image editing software on my phone. Depending on how far you want to go, you can get an even more refined result by hand tweaking it using Photoshop or other similar programs. Good luck.

P.S: If you want to make it look like it was drawn using black ink (like a manga panel) then I'm not sure that's gonna work so well, because the instruments used to draw it have distinct textures. You could still try, but I don't think it will look good.

Creation Station / Re: Realistic Guts: The Black Swordsman
« on: February 07, 2019, 10:34:08 PM »
This enhances the more washed out aesthetic of the original piece, making everything pop nicely. As far as shading and color palette goes I think you've done an amazing job.

Site & Forum News / Re: BERSERK emoticons!
« on: February 04, 2019, 11:43:18 PM »
Haha, he's not giving a thumbs up actually. This card (BK1 51) is based on a panel from episode 197 (first episode of volume 24), and Serpico's thumb is up because he just threw an acorn at Guts and is telling him it'd be nice if he died.

Oh yeah, that is a lot more like Serpico. I forgot about that specific moment in the manga. It really looks like an awkward thumbs up, hehe.

Edit: I gave myself the liberty to fool around with it:

Site & Forum News / Re: BERSERK emoticons!
« on: February 04, 2019, 10:28:07 PM »
Actually the one we desperately need is someone giving a thumbs up.

There is a TCG illustration of Serpico kind of uncharacteristically giving a thumbs up which I really like but I'm not sure how well it would transfer to emoticon format.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: February 03, 2019, 06:51:57 AM »
I've quit many a thing for having a lousy or baffling first ten minutes, so yes, I am going to criticize the first couple hours of The Witcher 2.

You seem to have a very different approach to playing video games in general. I'm not gonna say there is a right or wrong way to play something, but I don't think you would be giving any game a fair chance by ditching it in 10 minutes if it didn't instantly captivate you. If you don't like reading bulks of text and taking your time to dissect a more complex game like that, it might simply not be your slice of cake. That is perfectly fine with me, but I'm not sure it's a fair thing to assume the game's at fault if you weren't interested enough.

First impressions are important.

I very much agree that first impressions are important, not in the same sense unfortunately. To me, The Witcher 2 as a game, not as a first couple of hours (which you seem to have found confusing and dissonant enough to potentially compromise the entire experience for a new player) offers a strong first impression for the series.

Maybe it's just me, but I was perfectly able to enjoy and understand, for the biggest part, the most important things about the story without having touched the first title, through the various exposition methods found within. I didn't immediately understand everything that was going on in the beginning obviously, but you shouldn't expect to be invested in characters and instantly catch on to everything that is going on right off the bat, even in standalone titles this is a whole process, even films do it. The Witcher 2 simply has somewhat of an overwhelming start; knowing who Foltest is beforehand bears negligible impact. As a matter of fact, things in this game tend to generally get more and more clear the closer you get to the end, that's just how the story was designed, so from where I'm standing you're looking at it completely wrong.

Overall, I think the huge boost in quality over the first game and the charm and anticipation it builds for the Witcher 3 make it a sweet point to get into the mess that is this series. Seems like you're not sharing the sentiment no matter how many reasons I offer, so let's just accept that we're not on the same wavelength on this one. I could honestly talk about the Witcher all day but I wouldn't wanna become redundant.

Berserk Merchandise / Re: What are the best ways to support Berserk?
« on: February 01, 2019, 04:31:39 PM »
I like that the deluxe editions adopted the same title font as the newer Japanese prints.

Let me fix it for you.  :serpico:

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: February 01, 2019, 02:38:28 AM »
Characters like Triss and King Foltest enter the scene establishing point blank that they have a history with Geralt, but the chaotic opening doesn't really allow for the player to learn what exactly that history is. Which not only makes things potentially confusing for someone unaware of those histories, but it also means they'll be less likely to care about those characters, which a cliffnotes version is never going to accomplish.

From the opening cutscene the player is clearly shown that Geralt and Triss have a romantic relation of sorts, which is more than enough to get things started I would say. Her character from the first game was significantly redone, not just visually. The only important thing the player needs to know about her in the beginning is that she and Geralt have a background as lovers, most of her development that will actually bear an impact in the future happens throughout the second game.

Foltest's character and his political schemes have the highest possibility to be confusing for a new player, but you are given basic explanations in the introduction that Foltest is the king of Temeria and Geralt saved his life from an assassin at the end of the previous game. That is honestly all you really need to know about Foltest and his politics because right after, he dies and becomes pretty much irrelevant going forward.

Most of the characters that you are expected to care about get properly introduced and developed as the game progresses.

The opening is itself a very chaotic sequence that has a lot of things going on all at once.
Even for someone who's played the first game, familiarized themselves with the world, and knows how things led up to this point, there's a lot to take in. For a lot of newcomers who aren't aware of what they're supposed to know and not know, it can get overwhelming, and while some might be willing to do the research to get the full story, I honestly don't expect the vast majority to do that or even want to do that, especially when they're just beginning.

The chaotic nature probably has more to do with the fact that the story is based on a bunch of books and is more complex than your average video game story in terms of raw information. I never felt like I needed to open a wiki or do any separate research though. All the relevant information is in the game, and it gives you enough to never feel like you have to go back and play the first one because it's too confusing. Honestly, if you're not an absolute dumbass you will be able to connect the main pieces together. The biggest part of the first game can be easily overlooked.

Once again, the developers made the Witcher 2 conscious that it will be a first experience for many people and added the important bits that you would want to know from the first one across the whole game. That "in medias res" beginning doesn't really dictate how good of an introduction to the series the game as a whole is. You're focusing too much on the first couple of hours for each, instead I think you should look at how the complete experiences fare. Sure, The Witcher 3 might start less abruptly, but once you advance into the story, characters start coming into the picture, past events and choices become relevant once again. There's even a segment in the Witcher 3 where you're asked what choices you made during the second game, signifying once again how much more tied together these two are, compared to 1 and 2.

More might have happened in the transition between 2 and 3 than 1 and 2, but those events are broader and more detached from the characters you follow in the third.
Meanwhile, the events between 1 and 2 are a lot more personal.
But understanding how he got in that position is complicated because, well, that's encompassed by the plot of the first game.
...because not only does it begin so abruptly, but it's still addressing things left hanging from the first game.

It's true that the focal point of the first two games is Geralt's amnesia, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are deeply connected as far as story goes. I don't think the events between 2 and 3 are more detached. All three of the games have their own sub-plots, but I think 2 is where the main plot started connecting the most. The first game is more like a bunch of isolated extra content happening when Geralt had amnesia, from which the only story related thing that carries on is Foltest, the rest bear no aftereffect and you can just return to them later. The second game starts with the same premise of amnesiac Geralt but in this one the events actually lead to him getting his memory back and learning relevant information for the main story of the third game. The second game is actually where you understand how his amnesia started and how he got into the position he was in during the first game.

...introducing the player to the universe, to Geralt, to his friends, to the politics, to the supernatural, to the witchers, and so on, which the second game decidedly does not.

The Witcher 2 contains plenty of information on Witchers, mages, geopolitics, the world and its inhabitants, character logs, bestiary, lore books and so on, just like the first game, but in addition to that it's got a refined linear story and is improved in every aspect. Unless you're a passionate CRPG fan, the first Witcher is not really worth going through first. Not to say that I don't like it, but my enjoyment of it comes mainly from the positive first impact the second game had on me, leading me on to check the rest of the series out.

Guys like Geralt and Vesemir don't know all the specifics of what happened between Nilfgaard and the Northern Kingdoms, so the player doesn't really have to either, and they're not even involved with it anyway. The war is itself more of a backdrop than anything.

The war in the Witcher 3 actually plays the biggest role out of all three games. The "war ravaged lands" and all the Nilfgaardian camps and battlefields scattered across the open world indicate the continuity from the second game; and if I remember correctly you can cause Emhyr to lose or win the war depending on what choices you make, you can also get Radovid assassinated. There are definitely ways in which the player and Geralt can get involved in the political spectrum of the game.

Not everyone is gonna care about the political gibberish, but for those who do there is a lot of information and trivia to be found in both 2 and 3 - which constitutes another arguably important connection between them.

Well of course the first game isn't going to set the scene for TW3. It sets the scene for the TW2

You didn't understand, let me reiterate:

You can't say the first game sets the stage for the second to the same extent the second does for the third (I hope that wasn't even more confusing).

And I wouldn't really say it's all that important to play to understand who Yennefer is and what the Wild Hunt is, considering that both only exist through expository flashbacks that have nothing to do with the actual narrative of the game, which makes them come across as random when they do come up.

That is not true. The flashbacks are not the sole exposition for Yennefer and the Hunt. You actually get quite a lot of important dialogue from Letho right at the end which tells you how the WH took Yennefer away and how Geralt tracked them down and ended up joining them in exchange for her. The randomness of the flashbacks that you mentioned finally ties together and Geralt's amnesia is concluded.

I remember how eager I was to play the Witcher 3 after finishing this game, to finally confront the WH and find out what they are, to see Yennefer's character after hearing so much about her, to see if Letho will make another appearance (if you let him go) and so on. That's why these story elements are important.


I believe the Witcher 2 facilitates a better and more immersive first impression for the world of the games without compromising too much and builds real anticipation for the Witcher 3 (it made me really glad I didn't go into it completely blind). Also, if afterwards you want to play the first game and fill in the extra tid-bits, references, side story and character interaction you will likely have a much easier time dealing with the lack of polish it suffers from.

Berserk Merchandise / Re: What are the best ways to support Berserk?
« on: January 31, 2019, 05:12:31 AM »
Yeah, we've talked about the hard cover editions here before. I actually like the "more serious" look of these. I only wish there were better reasons to buy them aside from a bigger format and improved paper quality.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: January 31, 2019, 04:53:07 AM »
The Witcher 2 is a good game, but I think it's a pretty bad place to jump into the series.
I agree that it's more rewarding to go into the third game with the accumulated knowledge of everything that happened in the previous entries, but at the same time, I think it does a better job at acclimatizing newcomers to the series with its more slow-paced beginning.

That's how I personally got into the series, and it's what got me so hooked on the whole concept of the games, hence why I'm recommending it. The Witcher 3 could arguably have a similar effect, but I don't know if I would've enjoyed the second game as much had I played the Witcher 3 first. In other words, both are good starting points, but I honestly believe playing them in chronological order enhances the level of enjoyment for each one individually and also for the long run; and it's not the case where you play through a bunch of underwhelming prequels just to have a slightly better experience with the latest installment either, these are both solid games and it would be a shame not to profit and maximize the experience.

It just seems like it throws too much at you at the beginning without giving you a reason to care or understand what in the Sam Hill is going on. It feels like it was made with the expectation that you played the first Witcher and are already familiar with the universe.

It didn't seem so to me. In theory it was made as a sequel, but it was completely redesigned to play and feel like a fresh game, upholding little elements from its predecessor, as to not be too confusing for the console players and other newcomers to the series. It even gives you a rundown of what Witchers are and the few major plot points from the first game (which can be, and in fact were, summarised in just a couple lines of text). That is why I believe it's the optimal starting point.

Even if, unlike the 3rd game, this one throws you right into the action from the get-go, it still takes the time soon after to explain what is going on. There are also more story elements, characters and world building that carry on between 2 and 3 than there are between 1 and 2. By playing 2 you get crucial insight about Yennefer and the Wild Hunt (which are basically at the core of the 3rd game), the conflict with Nilfgaard, characters like Letho, Roche and the Blue Stripes, King Radovid and many other small references. It basically sets the scene perfectly for the Witcher 3. The same can't be said about the first game.

When trying to determine the best entry point for The Witcher series I concluded the best course of action was just to not to play any of them. Conundrum solved! :guts:

Griff, you God damn troll  :iva:

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: January 30, 2019, 08:01:01 PM »
I'm about to get the Witcher 3 it looks sick.

I highly recommend playing Witcher 2 first in case you haven't yet. It's a good game in its own right and will make for a better immersion into the story and events of the Witcher 3.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: January 20, 2019, 02:23:31 PM »
Finally got myself a PS4 (found a good deal for a used Slim 1T on eBay) and picked up Dragon’s Dogma Dark Arisen at GameStop.

I played around 60 hours of the PC version and had a good time. The combat and exploration are both amazing assets of this game. I'm not a huge fan of the pawn system, but overall it's a great action RPG.

Played just a bit last night, chose the “literally Guts” player character preset, and for my main pawn I went with my girl Farnese.

Not coincidentally, the game developers are fans of Berserk. As you might already know, there was even a collaboration between Capcom and the producers of the Golden Age Arc films to introduce Berserk costumes in the original version of the game, but they were ultimately removed because the licensing period expired or something.

That was one of the reasons I had bought this game, and felt kinda disappointed to find out they are no longer accessible. Nonetheless, the game proved more than worth it anyway, and you can still create Berserk characters with a satisfactory degree of accuracy if you really want to. I remember seeing other people's pawns made after Farnese and Schierke and they didn't look half bad.

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies to look forward to
« on: January 18, 2019, 08:13:23 PM »
It was more than a reference, it was clearly a teasing of the sequel. But I think a trilogy was planned since the beginning no?
Shyamalan has been talking about making a trilogy for a long fucking time, but it always seemed like a reach to me, given Unbreakable's shoddy reception.

Hm, I had no idea. I looked at that ending nudge as a "Hey, go check out this other film that I made, it's vaguely similar" more than a sequel tease. Not knowing much about the director's intentions beforehand and seeing how the individual titles have close to no connection, I guess the possibility of it being and intended trilogy just flew over my head at the time. I've always looked at them as unofficially related stories from the same creator, but I guess they're a full-fledged trilogy now.

Regardless, my point remains. It was the logical decision, planned ahead or not.

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies to look forward to
« on: January 17, 2019, 11:57:55 PM »
Glass is coming out tomorrow I hope it will be good just like split,or unbreakable. Though the things reviewers who had an early preview of it say doesn't seem reassuring.

I remember liking both, however long ago it was that I watched them. Unbreakable felt a bit monotonous and overly dramatic at times. Split was better, but they both had interesting concepts. I think ultimately combining the two worlds was the right decision, especially considering there was a direct reference at the end of Split, and everyone already considers them part of the same domain.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: January 14, 2019, 02:23:46 AM »
I'm leaning toward God of War since it's the latest and very well-received, but Wally made a strong case for The Last of Us...

God of War has some great combat potential, you can get really deep into the multitude of skills and ways in which to kill enemies. It's probably among the best out of any action game out there, both in terms of feel and technicality.

Creation Station / Re: Some of my drawings
« on: January 13, 2019, 09:32:13 PM »
The linework is detailed and intricate, must've taken you a long time. I like how it contrasts with the simpler style of the human figures and environment. Good work!

Anime Asylum / Re: Dororo (2019) TV Series
« on: January 10, 2019, 09:17:06 PM »
Yeah I saw that the other day. I like Dororo, I have the four volumes, but I'm not that hot about this project. Dororo's an old series and it's unfinished, too. I guess I'm just not sure it lends itself well to an adaptation.

I would say the animation and the reimagined art style look promising, but I can see how, combined with the music and the whole modern dynamic, they might feel incongruous, it is indeed an old manga. However, keep in mind that so is Devilman for example, and its most recent adaptation was rather well received. Not to mention that one had a contemporary setting on top of all. Dororo has a historical setting, so I think it will prove less difficult for them to maintain fidelity, stylistically speaking.

I can't explain it but somehow the similarity with berserk is more apparent than with original manga. Probably because pacing in slower compared to Tezuka's stories.

That could also be because of the difference in tone that you noticed, it having a more sombre approach (at least from the little that I've seen). The original manga had a constant comical air to it, not only because of Dororo's character, but often times expressed through the artwork as well.

I'm actually curious to see how the whole thing will be paced and rounded up, because as Aazealh implied, the "ending" left many things incomplete. I can only hope it won't get some low-effort, made up ending as a consequence. I guess we'll see, no point in making too many comments about it right now.

Edit: I've just learned that the number of demons was changed from 48 to 12, which I think is not a bad decision considering what I've said about the ending and pacing.

Anime Asylum / Dororo (2019) TV Series
« on: January 08, 2019, 03:48:31 PM »
Some of you may already know, but a new Dororo anime has surfaced with Tezuka Productions and Studio MAPPA involved in the making. The first episode is available for Amazon Prime users. You can find more information about the production team, cast and so on here

The latest PV:

PV2 (this one shows some action/fight scenes)

Character Cove / Re: The relevance of Berserk's opening scene
« on: January 04, 2019, 12:46:06 AM »
Well I don't disagree with the idea that Guts enjoyed humiliating the apostles (see my post above yours), however I think you assume too much here. What makes you think this apostle would have been willing to just fight it out? She was clearly not a warrior, she preyed on humans through seduction and deception. If she felt Guts was out to get her, she might have just fled and hid, and for all we know she might have been really good at it.

It's true that these are mostly assumptions. Despite that, what I wanted to say is - if his objective were to simply kill her, he wouldn't need to go that far to achieve it (the opposite of what I thought you meant in your comment - I might've misunderstood). I believe he went through all of that for the very specific reason of killing her in a way that would make her "taste her own medicine", as you said, and not because he had no other methods of killing her other than letting himself fall in the trap.

I don't mean to be rude, but Guts had to have a means of sensing and tracking her similar  to his pursuit of the other apostles...

Guts is a skilled warrior, but there are limits to everything. I don't know if he would've been able to track her down through the wood during the night, had she successfully got away from him. I am willing to bet though, that he would've been more than capable of killing her before she got a chance to escape, had he wanted to.

In any case, we should be dealing primarily with the content that we are given and not speculation surrounding the circumstances that could maybe have caused them.

Yes, this has derailed quite a bit. Many things could have happened leading to that situation, perhaps it's better to just leave it at that.

Character Cove / Re: The relevance of Berserk's opening scene
« on: January 03, 2019, 09:57:08 PM »
Interesting post, seasnipper. You made some perceptive points and as a consequence brought to light more food for thought for why this scene isn't irrelevant and shouldn't be considered as such by members of the community.

That's why he used himself as bait to take the monster out and "did whatever he had to" in the process.

Having sex with the female apostle, knowing she was an apostle, was Guts' way of asserting dominance over her. He played into her trap, and then demonstrated that she was in his trap all along. The experience was probably painful for him for the sensation in the brand alone. But if that exchange made him uncomfortable at all, it was clearly a price well worth paying for Guts.

I think Walter nailed this one better.

The way I personally interpret this scene is very similar: Guts could've easily taken that female apostle out without going through all the trouble of allowing her to "seduce" him so he could get and edge (that is without any doubt, because we see him straight forwardly engaging way more dangerous opponents in the same and immediate following episodes). The only reason I think he went along with her scheme, despite it being a painful and unpleasant experience was due to his vindictive state of mind. As Walter said, just cutting her down wouldn't be enough, he wanted to humiliate her by beating her at her own game.

This is a bit of speculation on my part, but I also like to think of this scene as Guts' way of taking revenge for Corcas, because even though he wasn't right there when it happened during the Eclipse, he probably realized what went down after he'd seen the aftermath. I like to imagine that the reason he went out of his way was to make extra sure those bastards die a horrible death, just like his companions did.

The fact that later on, Miura decided to include the female apostle from the begging in the Eclipse and have her murder one of the Band members also kind of enforces my belief. It's possible that he might have seen a good opportunity to give more context to that initial scene, and make it something more than just a violent and depraved manifestation of Guts' psyche and vengefulness at the time (which still stands well enough on its own regardless).

The irony of his use of the physically destructive Berserker armor coupled with a conscious intention to survive compared against his attitude during Black Swordsman is a nice inverted development as well, even if they both fall under the umbrella of self-destructive behavior.

In retrospect, I wouldn't be surprised if the introduction of the Berserker Armor were carefully considered by Miura in rapport to Guts' emotional and mental development. If the Guts we see in the Black Swordsman Arc (or other early post-Eclipse arc) had had access to the armor it would've likely caused his death; instead, the armor was introduced at a time when Guts had more emotional stability, responsibility for lives other than his own and new companions capable of preventing him from going over the edge.

... I still don't quite know what to make of the thoughts running through his head at the time, specifically, wanting to imitate what Griffith had done to her.

I don't think the intention was to imitate what Griffith had done. The mention of Griffith in that inner monologue was probably used as a parallel to indicate what Guts would come to be like if he went through with it.

If you look at it through the lens of filling the role of aggressor/controller, you come out with a pissing contest between Guts and Griffith at the expense of Casca's mind and body.

I find it incredibly difficult to even begin to imagine a pissing contest between Guts and Griffith taking place there, so I will firmly say that wasn't what happened.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on the matter.

I'm inclined to believe it could have been something as simple as pent up frustration on Guts' part, a moment of weakness and emotional instability, combined with some aspects of the inherent violence that is associated with sexuality for Guts, along the lines of what your initial post was addressing.

As you can see there are two distinct aspects to his behavior: warped sexual desire for Casca and self-centered destructiveness (with the Beast of Darkness saying he must lose everything). Casca is his light, so the dark part of his psyche that longs for self-destruction wants her out of the picture.

Also a fair point.

Site & Forum News / Re: BERSERK emoticons!
« on: January 03, 2019, 12:05:21 AM »
I think Luka could possibly work.

I had also thought of Luca but Cyrus beat me to it before I had a chance to post. I can picture her shrugging with a slightly tilted head and a lock of hair partially covering her eye, or something like that.

Possibly characters with a somewhat smug attitude, like Rochine or Morda.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4