As you can read here, DC comics is planning to reboot their entire comics universe, using the reboot to improve their digital distribution. This could be considered an awesome idea. Except for one thing.
They've done it before. Three times.
Besides, there are a ton of awesome ongoing stories in the DCU right now. There's the whole Brightest Day thing going on which is a really cool concept worth exploring (SparkNotes version: White Lanterns with the power of life created from various DC heroes). And there's Batman, Inc. (Batmen get franchised out to world cities and trained by Bruce Wayne), not to mention the awesome Dick Grayson as Batman/Damian Wayne as Robin thing.
And there's all of the less-popular, but still really cool things that probably won't get more than a cursory mention, such as Gail Simone's Birds Of Prey, or the Teen Titans.
Also, if you look at a similar reboot/updated universe done by Marvel, the Ultimates universe...you can see that it's less-than-encouraging. It itself got rebooted in ten years during the Ultimatum event. Watch the entire 3 part review. Yeah.
Of course, only time will tell whether this reboot will be a good or bad thing. Perhaps it will result in fresh, exciting stories while still remaining true to the basic character concepts that were originally put forward. But experience, and the fact that negativity is a little more entertaining than positivity, tells me otherwise.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Games As Art
Read the inspiration for today's rant here
Okay, so as of May ninth, 2011, video games are officially recognized as art by the US government. So long as the games are distributed for free. This helps...who, exactly?
Don't get me wrong, I would love it if games were recognized as a legitimate art form. But, see, the thing is, is that games are like movies, in that they require many people to make them and those people need to eat.
Honestly, why even have that stipulation? Is it true of any other art form? Here's a hint: NO, IT ISN'T BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LUDICROUS. Paintings are regularly sold to private collectors. Does that mean that those paintings are not art? Has Citizen Kane been made available for free to every member of the USA who wants it? And, last I checked, I still have to pay for books like The Odyssey.
Of course, the case could be made that one could go to a museum to see a painting or sculpture. However, while this is true, people usually have to pay money to get into a museum. Also, there is a definite shortage of museums dedicated to letting people play various artistic video games.
Why not just say, "Here, have a grant for $200,000 to help you make your awesome artistic game, if you make it back you can pay us back from the profits, if not, then your contribution to art is enough payback."
Would that be so hard? Besides, odds are people would buy any truly artistic game. Look at Shadow of the Colossus. Look at Bioshock. Hell, people are still buying and playing Myst. Myst!
Okay, so as of May ninth, 2011, video games are officially recognized as art by the US government. So long as the games are distributed for free. This helps...who, exactly?
Don't get me wrong, I would love it if games were recognized as a legitimate art form. But, see, the thing is, is that games are like movies, in that they require many people to make them and those people need to eat.
Honestly, why even have that stipulation? Is it true of any other art form? Here's a hint: NO, IT ISN'T BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE LUDICROUS. Paintings are regularly sold to private collectors. Does that mean that those paintings are not art? Has Citizen Kane been made available for free to every member of the USA who wants it? And, last I checked, I still have to pay for books like The Odyssey.
Of course, the case could be made that one could go to a museum to see a painting or sculpture. However, while this is true, people usually have to pay money to get into a museum. Also, there is a definite shortage of museums dedicated to letting people play various artistic video games.
Why not just say, "Here, have a grant for $200,000 to help you make your awesome artistic game, if you make it back you can pay us back from the profits, if not, then your contribution to art is enough payback."
Would that be so hard? Besides, odds are people would buy any truly artistic game. Look at Shadow of the Colossus. Look at Bioshock. Hell, people are still buying and playing Myst. Myst!
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Sony Thinks You Are Dumb
OK, so by now we should all know about what happened with the PlayStation Network, right? How it got hacked into and every single user's personal info got stolen?
Good, because I don't want to talk about all of that here; here, I want to focus on one thing. Sony apparently thinks every one of their customers is a mindless sheep.
Here's a quote: "These illegal attacks obviously highlight the widespread problem with cybersecurity. We take the security of our consumers' information very seriously and are committed to helping our consumers protect their personal data." That was Kaz Hirai, a Sony rep who spoke at a press conference on the morning of May 2nd. Here's the thing: he said that Sony expects you to believe that they take the security of their customer's info "very seriously."
If that were true, sir, then why did you store their passwords in unencrypted servers? Why do the internet equivalent of writing down all of the passwords and post-it noting them to your computer monitor? That doesn't sound like something someone would do if they were taking security "very seriously."
Guys, I want you to know something important at this point in the discussion: I have nothing against Sony, or the Play Station brand. The PSX and PS2 were two of the best consoles in the history of gaming, IMO. They had amazing catalogs of games, including Final Fantasy VII, Legend of Dragoon, Brave Fencer Musashi, Kingdom Hearts, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, etc. But this corporate bullshitting is really pissing me off. Like, really.
Come on, Sony, what next? Are you going to take a DualShock and try to rape the asshole of all of your customers with it, then claim that "the security of their rectal area is very important" to you? Just admit you made a giant goof and move on. I'm sure that people will gladly continue to buy your products. Especially if you don't insult their intelligence first.
Good, because I don't want to talk about all of that here; here, I want to focus on one thing. Sony apparently thinks every one of their customers is a mindless sheep.
Here's a quote: "These illegal attacks obviously highlight the widespread problem with cybersecurity. We take the security of our consumers' information very seriously and are committed to helping our consumers protect their personal data." That was Kaz Hirai, a Sony rep who spoke at a press conference on the morning of May 2nd. Here's the thing: he said that Sony expects you to believe that they take the security of their customer's info "very seriously."
If that were true, sir, then why did you store their passwords in unencrypted servers? Why do the internet equivalent of writing down all of the passwords and post-it noting them to your computer monitor? That doesn't sound like something someone would do if they were taking security "very seriously."
Guys, I want you to know something important at this point in the discussion: I have nothing against Sony, or the Play Station brand. The PSX and PS2 were two of the best consoles in the history of gaming, IMO. They had amazing catalogs of games, including Final Fantasy VII, Legend of Dragoon, Brave Fencer Musashi, Kingdom Hearts, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, etc. But this corporate bullshitting is really pissing me off. Like, really.
Come on, Sony, what next? Are you going to take a DualShock and try to rape the asshole of all of your customers with it, then claim that "the security of their rectal area is very important" to you? Just admit you made a giant goof and move on. I'm sure that people will gladly continue to buy your products. Especially if you don't insult their intelligence first.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)