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 - Griffith

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 387
Video Games / Re: Dark Souls II
« on: October 07, 2017, 05:08:46 AM »
I would have liked to have made more posts as I went along, but I've felt next to no motivation unfortunately.
I really wish I could make a post and just rant about the things I liked, but I'm really at a loss. Playing this game just feels like I'm going through the motions. Having instances of satisfaction while killing enemies is few and far between. I don't even feel good vanquishing the bosses, I almost feel dirty because of how easy they went down. But I digress.

Ah, someone's having fun! See, it's actually the most punishing Souls game ever, but this one won't test your skills, no, it's far worse, it attacks the mind! Forget being so mad that you had a bad beat against an insane boss and you broke your controller; Dark Souls II will cause you no less than an existential crisis where you question the meaning of it all! :guts:

Funny because my exact words were 'Discount Souls'. The only times the game is difficult for me is those treacherous i-frames acting a fool. Other than that, the only times I've died were from my own impatience or making a stupid mistake. The bosses are just plain simple. I guess you could factor in my playing Demon's Souls and Dark Souls before.

It's also a clear case of quantity over quality; Dark Souls II has a ton of environments and enemies, bosses, armors, weapons etc. but a lot of it is very forgettable; whereas Dark Souls I's and III's experiences have a much more crafted focus (for comparison Dark Souls II has like 40 bosses compared around half that in the other two games; so, there's some good ones in there, but they sure all ain't great). It's partly a matter of taste, sometimes I do like how big and open DSII is, especially compared to III, and there's no shortage of shit to do. Hell, despite my own bustin' on it here I'm also playing it right now! :ganishka:

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: October 07, 2017, 04:51:18 AM »
AND it's in a Wii-U only format that I doubt will be possible to recover through whatever free data recovery options are out there.

Got a local computer store or access to a real IT department? I've gotten tons of PC/data issues fixed for free just by bugging Walter asking the right dude with the knack. Plus, I say if you have to, and it's possible, be willing to invest at least $5-10 bucks into the recovery effort. That's a cheap lunch, and if you value your time a bargain to get back the equivalent of a 60 hour work week.

In any case, I can't decide if I will force myself to continue from somewhat near the beginning of the game and do stuff in a different order this time, or try to dull the pain by playing a new game like Cuphead or Ruiner(guess in the end I really might stop playing Zelda for it :)

If you can't get it fixed after putting some energy into that, I like Aaz's suggestion of jumping right back on Epona, and I'll add this wrinkle to make it more equivalent to his experience: try speed running Hyrule Castle and Ganon late one night, like just make a beeline for it after getting off the plateau. You might not be successful, but it's a different and exciting way of going at the game. That's what I did the first time I played it and it was pretty invigorating, especially because I got tantalizingly close to the end, and just that I even could (hint: take the heart to avoid 1 shots without decent arnor). It'll also get you stocked on late game food and weapons (and experience in my case)! Then, like you said, just try the areas you hadn't explored yet anyway until you get your groove back and it won't matter anynore; you'll want to play that shit forever anyway.  :ganishka:

News & Not News / AIM Going Offline
« on: October 06, 2017, 06:35:44 PM »


Like everyone else, I haven't used it in years, but do have a lot of fond memories communicating with everyone from my buds in high school, Wally and Aaz, to my wife. Going to miss those old "Direct Connect Wars" with Wally most of all (Barret: "My name is Albert Wesker." *ominous strings*)

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: October 04, 2017, 03:53:09 AM »
He really doesn't care for Mario Kart.


His coordination isn't quite there yet. He just runs into walls and gets frustrated.

Well, he is only 5, I guess I shouldn't expect him to drive yet. =) Plus, some of those Mario Kart games, especially the later ones, are just disorientingly busy. And the 2D ones on SNES and GBA are definitely frustrating to learn. Has he played Mario Kart 64 (Dr. Gamer over here looking for the right prescription =).

But yeah, I'm really counting on Nintendo releasing 3D World on the Switch, because I've been dying to play it.

It's no 3D Land, I can tell you that, but it pretty much allows you to carry anyone along on co-op.

Speaking of which, I'm relieved that he prefers Super Mario World to Super Mario Bros. 3. Just like dad!   :slan:

Correct answer. But serious question: IS there a better game than Super Mario World? No joke, there's literally hundreds if not thousands of "best game" contenders, accounting for taste, advances, etc, each arguably transcendently equal in their own right (many among Mario games alone), but from a pure gameplay standpoint is there anything above SMW? Without thinking about it I say no. =) Super Mario World: primus inter pares.

Awesome, I didn't even know there was a co-op mode in that. I played it on 3DS, but maybe I'll get it for Switch if he's interested.

Check it out:

Mega Mana. I can personally vouch for it as I played it through with an old buddy I used to go on all night Mega Man and beer binges with (wild and crazy guys). It actually worked quite well, though a word of warning: if he can't yet hold his own solo at that level of difficulty its co-op is not nearly as forgiving as Mario.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: October 03, 2017, 04:04:51 AM »
I've got a few of those ... There is something about Dark Souls II that is captivating. Maybe it's that ever-present sense of: "It'll get good in the next zone, for sure."  :void:

I think that's definitely part of it, like it's all just going to click if I put a little more into it... And sometimes it does, like right now I took down the King's Pets and Alonne and am ready for NG+ in good conscience, which will be at least my 4th playthrough actually, though this the first to completion. Anyway, even that, vacuous and frustruating as you aptly describe it, slog has a certain kind of appeal, like the game is trying to be more Dark Souls somehow, or the embodiment of the original's reputation as a dark, dreary, and punishing game. Except DS1 actually had a pretty rousing and even romantic mythology, and though things had gone to shit or were winding down, you were on the precipace, if not the driving force, of an exciting revival. In DS2 everything sucks and has gone to shit as well, which you hear again, and again, and again, and again, but this time you're just kind if stuck in it for the duration. It has its own charm I guess. =)

Played a few games on the SNES Classic with my son (almost 5 years old) over the weekend. During Secret of Mana: "This is fun, Dada. Why don't more games let us play together like this?"

Kid has a good point... The quick drop-in/out multiplayer in Secret of Mana is fucking fantastic. There are certainly co-op experiences these days, but nothing quite like Secret of Mana comes to mind. That game is more than 20 years old, and it's incredible to me how they nailed a single/multiplayer RPG, seemingly on the first pass.

The irony is the Wii U probably did this better than anything; I hope they port over the co-op Mario platformers to Switch to go with Mario Kart (and did they NOT port Smash?) for you and the boy. Those are perfect co-op for gamers of all ages and skills.

Also, my son is super into Mega Man, and really loves Mega Man X so far. But I don't know what I'm going to tell him when I get to Sigma and absolutely can't beat him...

That's a lad with good taste, and if you want to save face, and put him to the test, tell him you've done enough and he has to do it and see if the kid reflexes take over. :ganishka:

BTW, a reminder that you gotta try Shovel Knight co-op with him if you haven't already. It's Mega Man meets Mana!

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: The Horror Movie Thread
« on: October 03, 2017, 02:43:12 AM »
My wife and I recently watched the 1990 IT miniseries and the new movie. Her on IT via the 90s version, "It was less scary parts than I thought and more about nostalgia." I told her she basically just nailed Stephen King. The new one had kind of an awkward first half but came together well enough in the second. It was ok, nothing embarassing, but I don't really see what the box office fuss is about either. I kind of thought the cheesy 90's version was better, at least its rendition of the kids' story. They actually seemed like kids in that one while here Bill, Bev, and Richie are already like adult characters, and the rest of the kids are marginalized, Eddie and Ben aren't critical (despite Ben basically getting Mike's role too), and Mike and Stan might as well have not been in the movie. Anyway, Tim Curry was also a better Pennywise obviously, like an actual scary child predator, wheras Skarsgard's version is over the top and a bit cliche with all the frantic quavering and warbling. I didn't buy those kids overcoming him either; the 90's version cheese scares, yes, but this version is so big and bad it would be like pretending not to be scared of a real monster, or like an attacking bear. Those kids would be pissing their pants, and it actually seemed more physical than anything, like seven kids is all it takes just to physically kick Pennywise's ass.

We also saw Get Out, which actually lived up to the hype because it had all the sharp social satire as advertised but at its heart a horror premise and twist that would work in any scenario, and it was elegantly constructed to present and deconstruct both simultaneously. Very cool.

Video Games / Re: What Are You Playing?
« on: October 02, 2017, 02:37:10 PM »
I like the idea of Ghouls n Ghosts. But two decades removed from its inception, it's punishingly difficult and not very much fun.

I distinctly remember how funny it was when you get knocked down to your underoos halfway through the first level, but unfortunately that's also about as far as I got. =)

Playing... a reinstalled Dark Souls II until 3am before a tough day at work! Noooooooo! :judo: I did beat the third DLC boss and am now taking care of loose ends (the optional "pets" in the Frigid Outskirts and then Sir Alonne). Had the pets on the ropes last night until one jumped seemingly halfway across the arena to kill me mid-Estus (and it was such a pain to get there)! I'M PLAYING DSII AGAIN AND I HATE THIS GAME! :mozgus:

Video Games / Re: Games to look forward to!
« on: October 02, 2017, 02:22:59 PM »

Nioh is coming to PC! Previously a popular Dark Souls evolutionary derivative I couldn't care less about (hmmph!)... that suddenly think I might maybe definitely play! Funny how that works. :carcus:

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 07:12:02 PM »
Indeed, the big question with the beast to this day is whether or not it can be tamed. Can Guts keep this side of him under control (a proposition made especially tricky by the Berserk's armor)?

My initial reaction was a big negatory but that's not actually what we've seen as it did, albeit ominously, come to something of a truce with Guts for a while with the promise to go wild later (clever beast =).

Now that's a good question. I think they were reading his mind. We know they can do that and it would uncharacteristic for them to be able to implant a thought within his mind (they're not that powerful). Regardless, it's interesting that Miura chose to introduce the character through these guys.

Well, that also touches on the production side of the question: did Miura plan it from the start or was it just a cool concept he introduced there and liked so much he brought it back and continued to run with it until it became something of a defining character(istic)? I think that evil personification was an easier way for him to display, and separate, Guts' dark side after Lost Children so he didn't have to go back and forth dirtying and redeeming him to maintain such a complicated balance, while also making it easier to show that struggle with a tangeable adversary.

The keen observer will immediately know that it is a helmet, for it has rivets. :badbone:

A geunine bone helmet made from his own skull!? :isidro: :troll:

Character Cove / Re: The Beast & Dog/Wolf Themes in Berserk
« on: October 01, 2017, 07:36:58 AM »
This debate sure has gotten dogmatic, huh boy?

My two cents is that the Beast obviously, though not exclusively, plays on the appearance of dogs and wolves (duh, right? well I said "obviously"), which can have a number of general meanings, like it being almost the proverbial "beast" and the one with the closest relation to man as a friend and foe, as well as ones specific to Guts (uh, he's encountered some dogs before and been called a dog on at least one occasion =). So, I don't think there's any harm in paying attention to such imagery throughout the series, even if that's all it is. It could potentially be allusury or subtextual (even retroactively), but it's not the text, and trying to codify it is where it falls apart because if Miura wanted it to be connected to Gambino's dog or something Guts would simply make that connection (and perhaps he will). In any case, given the appearances of the Beast as well as the lack of information we have connecting it to much else in particular, it's a little silly to furiously debate whether or not it looks like or is in fact a dog and how significant that is. I mean, look at all these pictures (and the one above), and I can't believe there aren't any already in a thread discussing the appearance of the Beast, and tell me what it all means:


Uh, yeah, it looks like a dog, but also definitely not (and the meaning and function of its appearance seems more related to representing how wild and dangerous or relatively "domesticated" the beast is behaving than anything else to do with dogs in the series). Frankly, I'm still more interested in how it manifests externally in its first appearance yet is part of Guts' psyche (did those ghosts in volume 16 read his mind or Incept him? =).

Next debate: is Skull Knight a skeleton or is that even a real skull, and are the skulls in the series a reference to him!? :SK:

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Game of Thrones TV [spoilers]
« on: September 30, 2017, 06:34:43 PM »
I agree the show went downhill after it's season 4 peak (and now without a luxurious safety net of source material to fall back on as in the early seasons), but I don't think the problem is that there's too much fan service or that it's not being deferential enough to the source material, critiques that lie heavily on the perceptions of fans, it's just that the show hasn't been good in and of itself since it got boring in 5, crazy in 6, and frantic in in 7. It's not going to be the same as the books, and I don't put the books on a pedestal anyway (they omitted something from the book: oh now it can't be a good!), it's that the show stopped following it's own internal logic and has suffered accordingly. Make it completely different from the books for all I care, but make it good, and not so pat, with every good guy getting their triumphant revenge and every villain their just deserts, as you say.

Video Games / Re: Dark Souls II
« on: September 30, 2017, 04:55:09 AM »
I didn't realize it at the time, but Dark Souls 2 sunk nearly all of my goodwill towards that series, and I absolutely loved DS1. It's just a vacuous, frustrating experience compared to what came before. The most fun I had in that game was rolling around with a group of 3-4 random people near when the game launched, just mowing through enemies (beating the Pursuer during his little cameo appearance, too).

I know that Dark Souls 3 put the series back on track (right in time for it to be over!), and I've put ~8h into it at this point, but it hasn't recaptured the same passion as the first game, which had me completely entranced.

Yeah, and I think your love of the first game might also be a factor, ironically. You spent so much time playing and appreciating it that not only did you probably get more than your fill, but an experience impossible to match. DSII is probably a lot easier to swallow if one played and merely liked Souls than being "entranced" by it for 200+ hours. That's probably alsp part of the reason 3 never got much traction with you either; you pretty much already did Dark Souls to the hilt years ago, you already didn't need any more and II ran it into the ground. Back to your point, if DS3 had directly followed DS1 you might have played the shit out of it instead of so much more of the original Dark Souls.

Personally, despite a rocky start, I ultimately had a much more balanced experience with the three games, playing them relatively close together and giving each plenty of time, or more than enough in the case of DS2. My Dark Souls play hours:

Dark Souls II: 105 hours (roughly half before and half after DS1)
Dark Souls: 130 hours
Dark Souls II SotFS: 113 hours (Jesus, did I leave it on while I feel asleep or something, 200+ hours of DS2? -_-)
Dark Souls III: 200 hours

So, technically, I played DS1 for the LEAST amount of time, but I can confirm it was the best quality of time and leaves the strongest impression if not the "fondest" memories: the introduction, discovering and defeating the hydra, wandering the Duke's Archives and descending into the Crystal Cave, just magical stuff, and of course there's New Londo, Blightown, and the Tomb of Giants! :magni: So, these numbers are a bit deceptive, Dark Souls is a game I ultimately stopped playing because I was wholly satisfied and could move on before I actually diminished the experience; I didn't get tired of it, and I didn't want to, I wanted to have that experience again. Whereas Dark Souls II is a game I kept playing because I couldn't get satisfaction, desperately trying to have that experience again only to be left wanting (sounds a bit like the plot, actually =). Dark Souls III on the other hand, that was just what I was looking for to scratch that itch and so I played the hell out of it until I *DID* get tired of it, which is fine. I'm done and uninstalled them all because after 548 hours of Dark Souls I've died enough... well, unless I ever want to finish those last DS2 DLCs and try it's NG+, or Demon's Souls, or Bloodborne... I just don't know if I have the 200+ hours these days.

Oh, and because I never tire of the irony of this: "Wally, you should really play Dark Souls (III)!" Also, you'll have to forgive me for not watching Sneakers yet, because if history is any indicator I'm eventually going to watch it approximately 250 times and/or spend 15 years of my life posting at

Video Games / Re: Dark Souls II
« on: September 29, 2017, 01:34:10 AM »
Starting Dark Souls II up for the first time, I could immediately tell going from Dark Souls I to Dark Souls II was an extremely bad idea.
Dark Souls II, in my opinion, made a lot of missteps, and the introduction was only the first among them.

DSII is like some officially branded but licensed generic version of Dark Souls; it's trying to copy it, but it doesn't directly, everything is sorta different, yet it's frustratingly trying to parallel, connect, or at least bend toward some continuity that isn't really there (it's like they tried to make it fit with Dark Souls after the fact when they were really doing something else from the start). It also doesn't have the weird lore or the fascinating, interconnected world and environments to fill you with the same dread and whimsy (it's more like any generic fantasy game). On the other hand, it's actually got it's own thing going on and trying something a little different, plus it's HUGE, it's like Dark Souls ad infinitum and you can summon so many people it's ridiculous: Dark Souls the MMO. :ganishka:

From the gate, character movement seems so.. off.
If you think rolling feels off when you do it in a vacuum, wait 'til you actually try to seriously use it to dodge enemies.

Or, at least it could have been DS Online, except as you both say, the controls don't feel like Dark Souls either. I've still never gotten used to it, no matter how high I level my iframes, and it was the first Souls game I started (so if you think it's relative coming from 1 I actually went from 2 to 1 =)! DS1's and 3's rolls and hitboxes are far more fair/forgiving depending on how you look at it, and I've read a lot of people saying that DS2 is actually the easiest one but that hasn't been my experience at all no matter how I tried to exploit the benchmarks. It just never feels comfortable, like my character is wearing weights or underwater or something.

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Twin Peaks Returns
« on: September 24, 2017, 05:44:55 AM »

This came out better than his previous "experiments:"

 :ganishka: :magni:

And since it was a hot topic of conversation among us here's an interview with Lynch on the music & sound design of The Return including Bowie's voice and what his tea kettle form was supposed to be.

Update: God damn link didn't paste.

Video Games / Re: Dark Souls
« on: September 24, 2017, 05:03:55 AM »
I played Demon's Souls years after Dark Souls and was surprised with how much I loved it. Ended up being one of my favorite games of all time.


But yeah, try DS2 and DS3 out, they're both inferior to the original, but worth giving a shot if you've got the time. I actually thought DS2 was okay, and played through it a bunch of times, but really didn't like 3.

Interesting, DS2 was my first and I have a real love/hate relationship with it to this day; I want to love it and always end up sort of hating it. DS1 was an on again/off again experience until I finally found my groove and then it was really ON, just an all-time classic that lives up to the legend. That enthusiasm carried over to DS3 for me in a big way and I played the hell of it from every angle, numerous NG+'s, all the DLC, even elements I usually rather avoid like the various forms of multiplayer were embraced. Though, as definitive as it tries to be I realize it's ultimately just as derivative. And strangely, I've put the most time into 2 (over 200 hours between the original and SOTFS) even though it's my least favorite, the one I'm least adept at, and I've yet to complete its final DLC or try its more comprehensive and intriguing NG+. I guess that's why it's the one I still fire up every once in a while; unfinished business, and I'm still looking for something I think is there but haven't quite found. I never quite mastered it and never quite figured out if it was worth it.

Video Games / Re: Dark Souls
« on: September 23, 2017, 08:48:27 PM »
I'd also recommend Dark Souls III if you get tired of replaying NG+; unlike DS2 it's a true sequel and very much a love letter to the original Dark Souls, and I'm told Demon's Souls as well.

As for DS1 I had issues with NG+ because I used a fully upgraded Divine Claymore in my initial run and it was just too weak against most NG+ bosses for my taste. But then upgrading weapons to +10 can be a pain in the ass so I didn't want to be screwing around experimenting to find what I liked, so I just tried the Black Knight weapons and they're ridiculously powerful and relatively easy to upgrade to their +5 max with twinkling titanite. The axe does crazy damage, but halberd isn't far behind and is much faster with an better moveset. I think I read later it's possibly the best weapon in the game (and technically you can get it from a random drop in the first 10 minutes).

As for Seath, if I recall the Paladon armor should still work... or you can just cheese him to death with arrows. =)

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Twin Peaks Returns
« on: September 16, 2017, 03:20:09 AM »
Without the anxiety of wanting to know where this is all going, people will finally be able to fully embrace Jacoby painting shovels, Steven mumbling in the woods, etc.

Well, I don't know if I'll embrace all those scenes (I never minded Jacoby though =), but true enough that the urge to see what happens next and for satisfaction can taint the moment and cause any digression, however interesting, to feel like a delay.

edit: :sad:

Ah man, conversations about the series with my dad naturally gravitated toward his presence; old as hell, but still the same Harry Dean Stanton!

This was fast:

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Twin Peaks Returns
« on: September 15, 2017, 04:28:11 PM »
He should just make a 2 hour long movie without pointless scenes and it would be both high quality and produced relatively fast.
Mulholland Drive was supposed to be a show. He only filmed the pilot and after tv execs rejected it, he filmed another half and made it into a feature, in what is considered by critics as the best movie of the century - - I don't know if i agree, but it's certainly his best movie.

While I certainly had my complaints, and aren't as bullish on it all as Eluvei, I don't know that the more extraneous stuff was "pointless" or worthless, like filler. Maybe useless to the overarching plot, but not to the mood, tone, themes and viewing experience as a whole (sometimes the point was them and the feeling they elicited existing in and of themselves, and sometimes I learned more about certain characters and sympathized with them, like Shelly and Bobby, through others, like their daughter and her troubles. Anyway, I would have wanted some of the content about two thirds of the way through to be more balanced with the plot (though I'm not even sure that wasn't intentionally referencing some ghosts of Twin Peaks past), but I don't know that I would have excised anything entirely. My usually strong belief in the principles of storytelling economy need not apply here.

Sometimes creativity needs obstructions.

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Twin Peaks Returns
« on: September 15, 2017, 06:56:32 AM »

Ahhhh, the sweet validation I so desperately crave. A point of Karma to you, sir!

Hmmm, something to focus his creative energy into in his twilight years. Probably a good thing if he can come up with an idea worthwhile enough to step on the meaning of this one, at least the ending, a bit.

He should just make a 2 hour long movie without pointless scenes and it would be both high quality and produced relatively fast.

Hey now! And have you seen Fire Walk With Me? Is that really what he did? Actually, I like The Missing Pieces too so I can't say anything. =)

The Third Season will be out on DVD and Blu-ray on December 5, 2017


Because these wonderful design ideas were already taken:


They should have got in touch with @crisvector because, again, he has all the promotional artwork they'll ever need:

I mean, Jesus Christ:

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies to look forward to
« on: September 13, 2017, 07:17:29 PM »
I wish it was Brad Bird, but Abrams is fine.

Ah ha, it was Bird who said Trevorrow reminded him of himself (couldn't recall)! That would have been funny.

Hey, The Leftovers is finished, so Damon Lindelof is free, right? How about a "dream team" tag team of Lindelof/Abrams?  :ganishka:

Finally a Star Wars movie for Nightcrawler!  :troll: It would also help that Lindelof would "logically" remove all pre-established connections to Star Wars and replace them with generic offshoots based on them, "What if we made the Wookies little and the Ewoks huge and called them Eikoows amd Kowes!? BRILLIANT!!"

Or better yet, speaking of would-be Star Wars directors, how about George Lucas' original choice for the third part of the trilogy: :carcus:

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Twin Peaks Returns
« on: September 13, 2017, 06:04:06 AM »
They are releasing a soundtrack?  :ganishka:
90% of the music appeared in other formats years ago or in other Lynch's projects.
As a composer i found it sad that they didn't hire someone to score the show, and it was distracting to recognize most of the rehashed music from other movies/albums.

Well, that's sad to hear, fortunately my familiarity with his work overall is limited enough that any recycled music, other than from Twin Peaks, didn't affect me, but I also assumed the minimalist score was otherwise intentional (or maybe he was just that into his own sound design). I honestly think I prefer the approach here than the original series' ubiquitous use of Laura Palmer's theme, Audrey's Dance and Freshly Squeezed (or variations such as Dance of the Dream Man) whether they were particularly warranted or elevating to a scene or not. Although that did work for the tone of the original Twin Peaks, I don't know that more Badalamenti or even a more traditional score would have worked better. You can disagree with the approach, choices or ultimately the results, but I don't think one can say music wasn't considered central to The Return either. It was a pretty prominent and notable fixture, even when it wasn't (much more than hums or tones, that is).

Update: New, original video uploaded.

I uploaded a new explanation of how to interpret the chronology and events of those last couple of episodes...

Movies, TV, Books & Music / Re: Movies to look forward to
« on: September 13, 2017, 05:53:29 AM »
Well well, look who's back...

Seems a good, if obvious, trade since Trevorrow's Lucas/Spielberg impression is really just a worse version of Abrams' and it actually gives this trilogy a symmetry like the original (hopefully not TOO much like the original though, amirite!? :troll:). Anyway, as lazy of an out as this seems I can't really think of a better choice. Rian Johnson could change my mind of course, or fuck up Luke Skywalker. Other than that I guess it would have been nice to finally fulfill the prophecy of Spielberg directing one of these things, but I think he pinky swore with George to never do that, or it's some ego thing of his own ("I'm bigger than George's one movie"). Plus, he hasn't been in his prime for a while now anyway. It'd be like getting Michael Jordan on your team but from the Wizards. Probably better to take the current All-Star than watch Spielberg make his own version of the prequel debacle instead of adding the fun or pathos you might expect.

I think the gentleman doth flatter me. Though what do you mean by this anomalous request? [Role-play? Does he question my authenticity? Can he see right through me? Does he somehow gaze past the mask hiding the empty, insatiable void of ambition which drives me exhaustively to lie, betray, and murder my way to the top!? I must destroy this threat or become a thrall to fear...] ...Ahem, I mean, surely you jest, but of course my friend, for who else would I write these missives as other than myself? You are clearly also one of fine taste. We should meet and make merry some night at a lovely tavern I know in the old part of town. Do not mind the late hour, for you will be under my protection and I swear to see you safely to your rest.

Cheers! :griffnotevil:


Character Cove / Re: Griffith vs Serpico
« on: September 12, 2017, 10:53:19 PM »
Oh, I completely agree, this decadent dandy would be no match for me! Now, he did trade blows three times, once for an extended period, with someone that last beat me in one stroke, but pay no heed. The more I think on it, the more I think my sword had a defect. It was the sword that lost, not Griffith!


I truly appreciate the vote of confidence, though I had little thought to what I was doing! I certainly did not think victory was assured and only out of stubbornness and the arrogance of never having lost did I go through with it and think I could possibly beat him on the first strike. I was basically gambling my life, and his if I was successful, on a single sword stroke as Guts did against Zodd (or so he told me). Unfortunately, his strength and skill completely rendered mine moot and he not only broke my sword but had the control, strength and presence of mind to stop his before cutting me down. As you can tell from my expression at the time, I was just as surprised he could do that as anyone (as a matter of fact, I had to bathe and change my undergarments before I went to rape the princess). I understand it was ultimately an act of compassion and friendship, but that mercy only made it more humiliating for someone such as myself. Anyway, thank you for keeping the faith my friend, that is still my only loss as far as I am concerned... and as you say, mayhaps there was a defect in my sword after all... :griffnotevil:


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 387