Anyone want to see the Discworld series back in the point and click atmosphere? I'd like to see it back as long as they make it animated like second Discworld game.
I actually didn't like the art style and animation of the second Discworld game. They don't follow the books very well. If I remember correctly, they made Ponder Stibbons look like a pothead.
You all act like shooters are terrible things when it's people who think Portal 2 is a wonderful game that should come under scrutiny because it's just not.
Well, compared to most bad shooters, Portal 2 is actually quite wonderful. Note that I'm comparing Portal 2 to 'bad shooters' and not 'shooters', meaning that I'm talking about shooters of low quality, and not shooters in general. Shooter's aren't all bad, though all bad shooters are bad. In fact, why do you not think Portal 2 is wonderful? I'm assuming you're a fan of shooters, which makes me wonder how you would think that people who like Portal (most people, actually) should come under scrutiny.
I actually didn't like the art style and animation of the second Discworld game. They don't follow the books very well. If I remember correctly, they made Ponder Stibbons look like a pothead.
Yeah, pretty much. Paul Kidby's Ponder Stibbons vs. Discworld II game Ponder Stibbons:
Yeah, pretty much. Paul Kidby's Ponder Stibbons vs. Discworld II game Ponder Stibbons:
Also, the trolls are green, scaly things instead of rocks. But to be fair, every artistic interpretation of Discworld look bad when compared to Paul Kidby's.
Games used to be fun and more like movies than they felt like military adverts. If they had Die Hard games out now a days I'd imagine that it would be Die Hard:Afganstan With A Democracy!
Armies are armies, people enlist that's great. But if you ask me military enlisting has gone hyper drive. Their may be no draft, but they have more adverts and commercials , and war games, than I remember in my entire life.
I respect men like Icedhope, who is a veteran, but war is not video games, and this sort of over exposure war has on video games, is frankly just boring me and making me sick. I'm sick of the guys getting together playing these silly games. I can't say there's a direct connection, but a lot of these guys are going off to wars now.
My brother thinks these games are so cool, and he's all about American *beep * yeah...
He's into guns, thinks killing is funny, like any "regular guy complex". I'm just glad that one of his friends isn't into wars, has that blinding patriotism that is defined only by government, military.
Don't get me wrong there's things I love about the USA.
I just don't think that video games and military need to be as in bed together as they are. We have the freedom of speech in this beautiful country, why don't companies do something a little more than release shooters, military games?
It's on over drive.
That's my opinion that this beautiful country protects.
I hope I don't offend any of our veterans here, out of respect of the human race.
No More 'Modern Warfare' games. And by that I don't just mean the Modern Warfare series, I mean the plethora of war games set in modern times. It's painfully obvious that developers, in their haste to break away from WW2 games, just set the next title 60 years later and had done with it. It was fine at first, but it's gotten ridiculous now and it needs to stop, mostly because they're all the bloody same.
Also, to the guy concerned about Max Payne 3 - it's still a-go. Rockstar are really focusing on it now that LA Noir is out. Woo, I guess.
Companies release shooters because they sell well, and the military/war genre is kind of an obvious way to go in a game about shooting people, no?
That said, it's hard to argue that even the majority of shooters are military based. Borderlands, Duke Nukem, Halo Reach, Crysis 2, Brink, Bulletstorm, Team Fortress 2, Monday Night Combat, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, Rage, Red Faction... yeah. There's a whoooooooole lot of recently released shooter games that are anything but modern military games. Look at that list versus Black Ops, Medal of Honor, and... um... have there been any other military games in the same period of time?
Not to mention I disagree with the idea that playing these games makes you pro-war, pro-USA-no-matter-what, or whatever you meant. I got into Modern Warfare 2 for a time and I'm about as anti-war in real life as it gets.
Companies release shooters because they sell well, and the military/war genre is kind of an obvious way to go in a game about shooting people, no?
That said, it's hard to argue that even the majority of shooters are military based. Borderlands, Duke Nukem, Halo Reach, Crysis 2, Brink, Bulletstorm, Team Fortress 2, Monday Night Combat, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, Rage, Red Faction... yeah. There's a whoooooooole lot of recently released shooter games that are anything but modern military games. Look at that list versus Black Ops, Medal of Honor, and... um... have there been any other military games in the same period of time?
Not to mention I disagree with the idea that playing these games makes you pro-war, pro-USA-no-matter-what, or whatever you meant. I got into Modern Warfare 2 for a time and I'm about as anti-war in real life as it gets.
Praising IRL militarism and having a FANTASY setting relied on militarism are completely two different things. Borderlands is fantasy, Duke Nukem is fantasy, TF2, Bulletstorm, MNC... They don't shove militarism to our faces, they don't take their own usage of guns that much, since they have other things to give to the player. The guns seen in those games mostly don't even exist in the real life, even. They are not pro-war, or try to impose that war is "serious business but someone's gotta do it" or stupid shit like that. That's the difference I'm trying to point out, not "this game has militaries, and militaries are bad, so those games are bad".
praising irl militarism and having a fantasy setting relied on militarism are completely two different things. Borderlands is fantasy, duke nukem is fantasy, tf2, bulletstorm, mnc... They don't shove militarism to our faces, they don't take their own usage of guns that much, since they have other things to give to the player. The guns seen in those games mostly don't even exist in the real life, even. They are not pro-war, or try to impose that war is "serious business but someone's gotta do it" or stupid shit like that. That's the difference i'm trying to point out, not "this game has militaries, and militaries are bad, so those games are bad".
Praising IRL militarism and having a FANTASY setting relied on militarism are completely two different things. Borderlands is fantasy, Duke Nukem is fantasy, TF2, Bulletstorm, MNC... They don't shove militarism to our faces, they don't take their own usage of guns that much, since they have other things to give to the player. The guns seen in those games mostly don't even exist in the real life, even. They are not pro-war, or try to impose that war is "serious business but someone's gotta do it" or stupid shit like that. That's the difference I'm trying to point out, not "this game has militaries, and militaries are bad, so those games are bad".
Uh. Did my post come across as saying that Borderlands and Monday Night Combat is pro-war?
Uh. Did my post come across as saying that Borderlands and Monday Night Combat is pro-war?
No, you're just saying that militaries are mostly in all shooter games, a void point to make since, as I said, having some militaries around and promoting militarism are two different things altogether. After this point onwards I just went further with the distinct characteristics of pro-war games to differentiate the two more clearly.
Ookay, we need to start a "STOP MODERN WARFARE" or "STOP ALL WAR SHOOTERS" thread, instead of filling this one with the same thing over and over again.
And there are shooters that try to impose pointless militaristic shit, just because the game has guns in them. Those games' depth is only measurable either with their Sun Tzu quotes that they copied/pasted from Wiki article, or how detailed the guns look and feel. People go NUTS, JUST BECAUSE the M4 gun in the game has the same reload time, same time interval between bullets, same weight, same height, same shit with a real-life M4. I don't know what the fuck it's like to hold an M4, and I hope I'll never actually learn that. But those guys are like already clustered so many unneeded information about all those guns, and when their sheer knowledge of nothing of importance is verified in a videogame it's just like porn to them. They don't even care about anything else. They get quotes by the game itself about war being bad and overall, shitty -which is done to be "cool" but in the end nothing but ridicilously ironic- they just go "Whoa, deep, bro" and then continue to their mayhem. This pisses me off greatly. What pisses me off is that I'm expected to know these stuff by default just because I'm a guy or some shit like that. It's the reason I don't like generic FPSs. It's also the reason why I don't like racing games or soccer games. I don't know how much gas a Citroen C4 can contain, or that guy playing in the defence line of Real Madrid. I'm not interested. Therefore I don't need some other people to verificate my knowledge on those.
I agree - and hope I'm doing that for the right reasons. Silverwolfpet wanted to "stop war games". But so many games I like are about war. Some games I like even rely on shooting as a central gameplay element (but far less as compared to most gamers I know).
We're obviously into story-based games, and a story always needs a conflict, however violent it may be. I do not object to real-life settings in games. I do not object to realism. Stories can be set in our world, no problem. But when the military accuracy becomes the sole purpose of the game, when it refuses to tell a story besides blowing up some people, I'm just not interested. Realism is there to make the story, the emotion more intense, not to create the ultimate war experience.
In the end, the vast majority of games, whatever the genre, are about conflict. Even sports games, to a degree (the goal is to defeat your opponent, so there's conflict there? I dunno).
The problem I have with games these days is that said conflict is represented by one modern country attacking another modern country with modern weapons in modern times resulting in a constant flow of modern warfare. And there doesn't seem to be a great deal of variation from this formulae in most big-name releases.
Games are supposed to fun, but there's not a great deal of fun to be had in doing the same thing over and over again. Isn't variety the spice of life? And clearly the spice must flow. So let's have a little more variety in out constant wars. Let's set them in space, or have us play as insects... perhaps Mushrooms or something. Let's have the main character be something other than a tough grizzled American. Let's have a Serbian committing Grand larceny, or maybe a British guy throwing shit at stuff. Let's focus on more interesting, exciting ideas, like the darkest days of our history other than World War 2. Let's have games that aren't so serious all the time, that kill the pain of endless gritty realistic blandathons. Let's have some seriously shocking plots, with nobody living forever. Let's have wars among the stars, where we can craft new and exciting worlds of war.
Let's be... different.
And let's have fun spotting all the games I was referencing there. Cookie to the first person to spot them all.
Ideally, they wouldn't even launch the final episode. Just....drop the project and apologize for ever making it. Making this should be seen as the biggest faux pas in Telltale history, far greater than delaying Jurassic Park for 6 months, certainly. That they continue to sell this thing as a finished product is something to be ashamed of, and the mere fact that it even exists has a negative impact on the entire genre. Fuck this tasteless, artless, pointless piece of shit.
Star Wars (Multimedia Empire, 1977-Present)
The few scraps of good that come out of it now and then just aren't worth the trash that surrounds them now. Post-Tartakovsky Clone Wars alone is enough to essentially counteract all good that has come out of the franchise post-prequels. I'm done. Stop it.
[highlight]REVIVE![/highlight]
....Honestly, for everything I can think of, I can think of a counter AGAINST reviving it. My candidates for this would be something relatively recently cancelled, so the original creators could pick it back up, and something that really needed a continuation and was cut short. I know such things exist in my criteria, and things that I'd like revived as well, but honestly this one is eluding me.
[highlight]CONTINUE! [/highlight]
Doctor Who (TV Series, 1963-Present)
This show has an amazing longevity and I can see it going on for a long time. Some shows have a formula that only allows for a short run, but Doctor Who is one of those rare shows whose core being inspires and practicaly demands longevity. As long as great people continue to be behind it, as long as they aren't afraid to pull out the "Time Lord Victorious" moments, and as long as the man behind The Doctor continues to have that innate "Doctor-ness" in their portrayals....I can't see how anything BUT continuing this series is an option.
[highlight]LEAVE IN THE DUST! [/highlight]
Maniac Mansion (Game, PC, 1987)
Any sequel will be swept up and controlled by its incredibly different but somehow far more successful successor. I don't want a "Day of the Tentacle 2", and I'd much rather just let the series remain at two games rather than have the first game exist only as "oh, that cute little spiritual start-off point of the Day of the Tentacle series". Ugh.
Ideally, they wouldn't even launch the final episode. Just....drop the project and apologize for ever making it. Making this should be seen as the biggest faux pas in Telltale history, far greater than delaying Jurassic Park for 6 months, certainly. That they continue to sell this thing as a finished product is something to be ashamed of, and the mere fact that it even exists has a negative impact on the entire genre. Fuck this tasteless, artless, pointless piece of shit.
Oof. Harsh. But, yeah, the game isn't perfect, far from it. In fact, it's the first time Telltale took a step back from their previous game (In my opinion, all their games up until Devil's Playhouse have been a step up from the last one). It's probably the only one where I'm not that psyched about when a new episode comes out.
Any sequel will be swept up and controlled by its incredibly different but somehow far more successful successor. I don't want a "Day of the Tentacle 2", and I'd much rather just let the series remain at two games rather than have the first game exist only as "oh, that cute little spiritual start-off point of the Day of the Tentacle series". Ugh.
Well, a Maniac Mansion 3 would be awesome. It could be a comedy version of Clock Tower! Are you sure you want "Maniac Mansion" to be left in the dust, or "Day of the Tentacle"?
Also, honestly, I'm not too keen on the upcoming JP game either. Not because I have low expectations of it or anything, I just didn't like the movies that much.
Any sequel will be swept up and controlled by its incredibly different but somehow far more successful successor. I don't want a "Day of the Tentacle 2", and I'd much rather just let the series remain at two games rather than have the first game exist only as "oh, that cute little spiritual start-off point of the Day of the Tentacle series". Ugh.
Although I am firmly in the "I want DoTT 2" department, I can relate to that. To be honest, it brings up something else which might belong here. But first, a small digression.
Very good Reasons to change a story from book to movie:
You have firmly understood the book's spirit and want to apply changes the author would have liked.
Some scenes feel better expressed using the specific possibilities of the medium movie.
The author has expressed regret about certain scenes as they were in the book.
In some cases, you might even want to apply changes where you think the author involuntarily neglected a certain strain of thought/ character/ story arc.
Very bad reasons to change a story from book to film:
You want to reach a completely different target group than the book did.
You do not want to keep the spirit of the book, but instead insert the spirit of the book's sequel.
You'd desperately like to get certain characters/actors in, which happened to be in the book's sequel.
You desperately want enough material to make two movies out of that one book.
You want to repeat, nay copy the success of a previous movie triology of yours.
Oh, so you got through Episode 3? Wow, have you got some perseverance.
Yes but I did have to force myself through Episode 3. I can't see myself booting up Episode 4 anytime soon as I've still got the following sat on my shelf and Hard Drive, waiting to be played...
Grand Theft Auto IV: Episodes from Liberty City
Red Dead Redemption
L.A. Noire
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare
Little Big Planet 2
Still Life
Costume Quest
Stacked
Deathspank, plus it's expansion
Hector: Badge of Carnage
Call of Cthulhu: Prisoner of Ice
Fallout: New Vegas
Mass Effect 2
Broken Sword: The Director's Cut
And, many more...
BttF: Episode 4 is at the very bottom of the list in terms of my interest in playing it.
Regarding Maniac Mansion... I'd love a 3rd installment but I agree that it should be something more original than "Day of the Tentacle 2". I think it should follow suit with the first two games and be set in a new take on the mansion and it's inhabitants. I view the series as taking part in alternate universes, where some things are the same but there's also many large differences (if that makes sense).
I love Still Life, but haven't beat it, it's on my old computer. I have to start over or go get my saves.
I've started it twice now and both times I got around half way through and then moved on to a new game. I did enjoy what I played of it though (except that fucking atrocious baking puzzle), I'll have to start over again soon.
Monkey Island-I need to know the story behind the Voodoo lady's manipulation!
Sam and Max-I really enjoyed the last series it sucked me in and had me glued to my screen If TTG can make it as good or better then series 3 then IL be happy.
I don't want to sound like a broken record on here but I would really like to see Poirot finish the last 6 books. I know I go on about it a lot but I'm just nervous it might get axed by faceless executives cos its not the flavour of the month.
I also rly think Wallace and Gromit game needs to be revived thats one of TTG's best works to date.
In the end, the vast majority of games, whatever the genre, are about conflict. Even sports games, to a degree (the goal is to defeat your opponent, so there's conflict there? I dunno).
The problem I have with games these days is that said conflict is represented by one modern country attacking another modern country with modern weapons in modern times resulting in a constant flow of modern warfare. And there doesn't seem to be a great deal of variation from this formulae in most big-name releases.
Games are supposed to fun, but there's not a great deal of fun to be had in doing the same thing over and over again. Isn't variety the spice of life? And clearly the spice must flow. So let's have a little more variety in out constant wars. Let's set them in space, or have us play as insects... perhaps Mushrooms or something. Let's have the main character be something other than a tough grizzled American. Let's have a Serbian committing Grand larceny, or maybe a British guy throwing shit at stuff. Let's focus on more interesting, exciting ideas, like the darkest days of our history other than World War 2. Let's have games that aren't so serious all the time, that kill the pain of endless gritty realistic blandathons. Let's have some seriously shocking plots, with nobody living forever. Let's have wars among the stars, where we can craft new and exciting worlds of war.
Let's be... different.
And let's have fun spotting all the games I was referencing there. Cookie to the first person to spot them all.
I'm useless at this, what's the game with a British guy throwing shit at stuff?! I hardly spotted any and I'm sure that I'm mostly wrong anyway but here goes...
I think that's about as likely as them finishing the Bone series.
I'm useless at this, what's the game with a British guy throwing shit at stuff?! I hardly spotted any and I'm sure that I'm mostly wrong anyway but here goes...
Playable Mushrooms? Definitely not Mario. Now, in what game did you play as a mushroom? (I admit this one is a little obscure, but there were two games in the series, so surely someone can get it!)
And since it was such an obscure hint, I'll tell you what the British guy throwing shit at stuff was - Saints Row 2. If you've seen Yahtzee's review of it, you'll be slapping your head right about now.
So if we take that one out, we're left with... well, I wasn't kidding when I said a dozen!
Comments
I actually didn't like the art style and animation of the second Discworld game. They don't follow the books very well. If I remember correctly, they made Ponder Stibbons look like a pothead.
Well, compared to most bad shooters, Portal 2 is actually quite wonderful. Note that I'm comparing Portal 2 to 'bad shooters' and not 'shooters', meaning that I'm talking about shooters of low quality, and not shooters in general. Shooter's aren't all bad, though all bad shooters are bad. In fact, why do you not think Portal 2 is wonderful? I'm assuming you're a fan of shooters, which makes me wonder how you would think that people who like Portal (most people, actually) should come under scrutiny.
I heard that they're making a crossover of these two. It's called Sam and Max Save The World.
Yeah, pretty much. Paul Kidby's Ponder Stibbons vs. Discworld II game Ponder Stibbons:
Also, the trolls are green, scaly things instead of rocks. But to be fair, every artistic interpretation of Discworld look bad when compared to Paul Kidby's.
Games used to be fun and more like movies than they felt like military adverts. If they had Die Hard games out now a days I'd imagine that it would be Die Hard:Afganstan With A Democracy!
Armies are armies, people enlist that's great. But if you ask me military enlisting has gone hyper drive. Their may be no draft, but they have more adverts and commercials , and war games, than I remember in my entire life.
I respect men like Icedhope, who is a veteran, but war is not video games, and this sort of over exposure war has on video games, is frankly just boring me and making me sick. I'm sick of the guys getting together playing these silly games. I can't say there's a direct connection, but a lot of these guys are going off to wars now.
My brother thinks these games are so cool, and he's all about American *beep * yeah...
He's into guns, thinks killing is funny, like any "regular guy complex". I'm just glad that one of his friends isn't into wars, has that blinding patriotism that is defined only by government, military.
Don't get me wrong there's things I love about the USA.
I just don't think that video games and military need to be as in bed together as they are. We have the freedom of speech in this beautiful country, why don't companies do something a little more than release shooters, military games?
It's on over drive.
That's my opinion that this beautiful country protects.
I hope I don't offend any of our veterans here, out of respect of the human race.
Also, to the guy concerned about Max Payne 3 - it's still a-go. Rockstar are really focusing on it now that LA Noir is out. Woo, I guess.
That said, it's hard to argue that even the majority of shooters are military based. Borderlands, Duke Nukem, Halo Reach, Crysis 2, Brink, Bulletstorm, Team Fortress 2, Monday Night Combat, Mass Effect 2, Red Dead Redemption, Rage, Red Faction... yeah. There's a whoooooooole lot of recently released shooter games that are anything but modern military games. Look at that list versus Black Ops, Medal of Honor, and... um... have there been any other military games in the same period of time?
Not to mention I disagree with the idea that playing these games makes you pro-war, pro-USA-no-matter-what, or whatever you meant. I got into Modern Warfare 2 for a time and I'm about as anti-war in real life as it gets.
Praising IRL militarism and having a FANTASY setting relied on militarism are completely two different things. Borderlands is fantasy, Duke Nukem is fantasy, TF2, Bulletstorm, MNC... They don't shove militarism to our faces, they don't take their own usage of guns that much, since they have other things to give to the player. The guns seen in those games mostly don't even exist in the real life, even. They are not pro-war, or try to impose that war is "serious business but someone's gotta do it" or stupid shit like that. That's the difference I'm trying to point out, not "this game has militaries, and militaries are bad, so those games are bad".
aaaamen!
Uh. Did my post come across as saying that Borderlands and Monday Night Combat is pro-war?
No, you're just saying that militaries are mostly in all shooter games, a void point to make since, as I said, having some militaries around and promoting militarism are two different things altogether. After this point onwards I just went further with the distinct characteristics of pro-war games to differentiate the two more clearly.
I was trying to say that I really don't feel like 'military shooters' are even all that over-present.
Oh well.
I agree - and hope I'm doing that for the right reasons. Silverwolfpet wanted to "stop war games". But so many games I like are about war. Some games I like even rely on shooting as a central gameplay element (but far less as compared to most gamers I know).
We're obviously into story-based games, and a story always needs a conflict, however violent it may be. I do not object to real-life settings in games. I do not object to realism. Stories can be set in our world, no problem. But when the military accuracy becomes the sole purpose of the game, when it refuses to tell a story besides blowing up some people, I'm just not interested. Realism is there to make the story, the emotion more intense, not to create the ultimate war experience.
The problem I have with games these days is that said conflict is represented by one modern country attacking another modern country with modern weapons in modern times resulting in a constant flow of modern warfare. And there doesn't seem to be a great deal of variation from this formulae in most big-name releases.
Games are supposed to fun, but there's not a great deal of fun to be had in doing the same thing over and over again. Isn't variety the spice of life? And clearly the spice must flow. So let's have a little more variety in out constant wars. Let's set them in space, or have us play as insects... perhaps Mushrooms or something. Let's have the main character be something other than a tough grizzled American. Let's have a Serbian committing Grand larceny, or maybe a British guy throwing shit at stuff. Let's focus on more interesting, exciting ideas, like the darkest days of our history other than World War 2. Let's have games that aren't so serious all the time, that kill the pain of endless gritty realistic blandathons. Let's have some seriously shocking plots, with nobody living forever. Let's have wars among the stars, where we can craft new and exciting worlds of war.
Let's be... different.
And let's have fun spotting all the games I was referencing there. Cookie to the first person to spot them all.
Back to the Future ("Game", PC, 2011)
Ideally, they wouldn't even launch the final episode. Just....drop the project and apologize for ever making it. Making this should be seen as the biggest faux pas in Telltale history, far greater than delaying Jurassic Park for 6 months, certainly. That they continue to sell this thing as a finished product is something to be ashamed of, and the mere fact that it even exists has a negative impact on the entire genre. Fuck this tasteless, artless, pointless piece of shit.
Star Wars (Multimedia Empire, 1977-Present)
The few scraps of good that come out of it now and then just aren't worth the trash that surrounds them now. Post-Tartakovsky Clone Wars alone is enough to essentially counteract all good that has come out of the franchise post-prequels. I'm done. Stop it.
[highlight]REVIVE![/highlight]
....Honestly, for everything I can think of, I can think of a counter AGAINST reviving it. My candidates for this would be something relatively recently cancelled, so the original creators could pick it back up, and something that really needed a continuation and was cut short. I know such things exist in my criteria, and things that I'd like revived as well, but honestly this one is eluding me.
[highlight]CONTINUE! [/highlight]
Doctor Who (TV Series, 1963-Present)
This show has an amazing longevity and I can see it going on for a long time. Some shows have a formula that only allows for a short run, but Doctor Who is one of those rare shows whose core being inspires and practicaly demands longevity. As long as great people continue to be behind it, as long as they aren't afraid to pull out the "Time Lord Victorious" moments, and as long as the man behind The Doctor continues to have that innate "Doctor-ness" in their portrayals....I can't see how anything BUT continuing this series is an option.
[highlight]LEAVE IN THE DUST! [/highlight]
Maniac Mansion (Game, PC, 1987)
Any sequel will be swept up and controlled by its incredibly different but somehow far more successful successor. I don't want a "Day of the Tentacle 2", and I'd much rather just let the series remain at two games rather than have the first game exist only as "oh, that cute little spiritual start-off point of the Day of the Tentacle series". Ugh.
Oof. Harsh. But, yeah, the game isn't perfect, far from it. In fact, it's the first time Telltale took a step back from their previous game (In my opinion, all their games up until Devil's Playhouse have been a step up from the last one). It's probably the only one where I'm not that psyched about when a new episode comes out.
Well, a Maniac Mansion 3 would be awesome. It could be a comedy version of Clock Tower! Are you sure you want "Maniac Mansion" to be left in the dust, or "Day of the Tentacle"?
It's probably the only one that I've dreaded playing the next episode.
Oh, so you got through Episode 3? Wow, have you got some perseverance.
Although I am firmly in the "I want DoTT 2" department, I can relate to that. To be honest, it brings up something else which might belong here. But first, a small digression.
Very good Reasons to change a story from book to movie:
Very bad reasons to change a story from book to film:
...and that, my dear friends, is why I'd like to:
[highlight]STOP![/highlight]
Peter Jackson's Hobbit Movies.
/edit: What a fitting post for number 2000!!
Yes but I did have to force myself through Episode 3. I can't see myself booting up Episode 4 anytime soon as I've still got the following sat on my shelf and Hard Drive, waiting to be played...
Grand Theft Auto IV: Episodes from Liberty City
Red Dead Redemption
L.A. Noire
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare
Little Big Planet 2
Still Life
Costume Quest
Stacked
Deathspank, plus it's expansion
Hector: Badge of Carnage
Call of Cthulhu: Prisoner of Ice
Fallout: New Vegas
Mass Effect 2
Broken Sword: The Director's Cut
And, many more...
BttF: Episode 4 is at the very bottom of the list in terms of my interest in playing it.
Regarding Maniac Mansion... I'd love a 3rd installment but I agree that it should be something more original than "Day of the Tentacle 2". I think it should follow suit with the first two games and be set in a new take on the mansion and it's inhabitants. I view the series as taking part in alternate universes, where some things are the same but there's also many large differences (if that makes sense).
I've started it twice now and both times I got around half way through and then moved on to a new game. I did enjoy what I played of it though (except that fucking atrocious baking puzzle), I'll have to start over again soon.
Monkey Island-I need to know the story behind the Voodoo lady's manipulation!
Sam and Max-I really enjoyed the last series it sucked me in and had me glued to my screen If TTG can make it as good or better then series 3 then IL be happy.
I don't want to sound like a broken record on here but I would really like to see Poirot finish the last 6 books. I know I go on about it a lot but I'm just nervous it might get axed by faceless executives cos its not the flavour of the month.
I also rly think Wallace and Gromit game needs to be revived thats one of TTG's best works to date.
I think that's about as likely as them finishing the Bone series.
I'm useless at this, what's the game with a British guy throwing shit at stuff?! I hardly spotted any and I'm sure that I'm mostly wrong anyway but here goes...
Modern Warfare
Star Craft
Flow
Pikmin
GTA IV
...I'm guessing 1/5 (if I'm lucky).
Dune
Is that what I mixed Pikmin up with (the mushroom reference)?
I havn't played Pikmin so I dunno if Mushrooms are in it but most people would think Mario.
And since it was such an obscure hint, I'll tell you what the British guy throwing shit at stuff was - Saints Row 2. If you've seen Yahtzee's review of it, you'll be slapping your head right about now.
So if we take that one out, we're left with... well, I wasn't kidding when I said a dozen!
Super Mario Bros. 2 you could play as Toad. Toad is a mushroom.
Canon snob.
I dont think I want to know
Um, Super Mushroom Brothers: Ultra Phlegm Edition for the Nintendo Wee?
Mushroom Men.
I don't even know what that is.
*goes to check through google*
Huh, looks pretty good.