-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Persona Community Thread: The Butterfly Effect
- Thread starter Dantis
- Start date
- Status
buddha0991
Member
persona 2 is the citizen kane.
SloaneRisette
Member
No Kirby 64 is the only Citizen Kane because it actually had a sled.
God it's like you guys know nothing about movies.
God it's like you guys know nothing about movies.
ScraftyDevil
Banned
But Persona 2 doesn't have excellent camera angles and makeup.
Okay, maybe Eikichi does.
It's funny to me because Citizen Kane isn't considered influential because of the story it told. It was influential because of the way it was told, something a lot of video games seem to miss. It's fine and dandy if you have a well written story, but I'm of a firm belief that everything in the game should actively reinforce the themes.
With GTA IV, people were going on and on about how revolutionary it was that you had this "remorseful" protagonist that could have friends and go on dates, but as soon as those sections ended you could go on joyrides and run over hookers with absolutely no remorse whatever. With Bioshock Infinite, they gave the player this huge interesting world, then did little with it as they had to force you down a scripted corridor shooter that barely scratched the surface of all the interesting, heavy topics reviewers said it was going to explore.
Are these games bad? Absolutely not. Both are great, solid games in their own right, but neither are game-changers that deserved all the hyperbole they received. And this is why I'm jaded when reviewers start talking about games that convey complex emotions: I have to see for myself if the gameplay and the story actually reinforce each other, because that's what the industry actually needs to move forward from an "emotional maturity" standpoint. Until then, I'll just be happy to get these solid, well crafted games that poke at interesting themes we've never seen before. I'm perfectly content with that.
With GTA IV, people were going on and on about how revolutionary it was that you had this "remorseful" protagonist that could have friends and go on dates, but as soon as those sections ended you could go on joyrides and run over hookers with absolutely no remorse whatever. With Bioshock Infinite, they gave the player this huge interesting world, then did little with it as they had to force you down a scripted corridor shooter that barely scratched the surface of all the interesting, heavy topics reviewers said it was going to explore.
Are these games bad? Absolutely not. Both are great, solid games in their own right, but neither are game-changers that deserved all the hyperbole they received. And this is why I'm jaded when reviewers start talking about games that convey complex emotions: I have to see for myself if the gameplay and the story actually reinforce each other, because that's what the industry actually needs to move forward from an "emotional maturity" standpoint. Until then, I'll just be happy to get these solid, well crafted games that poke at interesting themes we've never seen before. I'm perfectly content with that.
Absolutely agree, it was a enormous achievement in a technical sense for the film medium.
I'm with you Scrafty, been wanting to go back and play the original for a while.
Until then, films were limited in the kinds of stories they could tell. Everything had to be linear and based in one time period. Citizen Kane made directors realize they could use these new tools to tell stories on a much wider scale, controlling time as they saw fit. To "match" that achievement in gaming would mean that we discovered a ton of new tools that allowed completely new stories to be told. Just because you put a deep, emotional, well written story on top of a first person shooter doesn't make it that kind of achievement.
And to be fair, I think MANY games have already done this in various ways, which makes the whole comparison totally moot.
ScraftyDevil
Banned
I feel like most of the advances in cinematography and special effects it made are taken for granted nowadays. I mean, they achieved a realistic-looking scratchy film grain effect by dragging the negatives across a concrete floor, while today's computers can do it in a split second. That kind of stuff was groundbreaking, and yet people yawn and talk through the movie whenever I show it to them.
That being said, it's not on my Top 10 list or probably even my Top 20. It's still a fantastic film that should be treated as more than a buzzword though.
It's because CGI often looks really fucking fake, unnatural and makes a lot filmmakers lazy. Often something actually in the frame looks 100 times better. Building sets, props, and location shooting will always be superior. It's why films like Blade Runner will always be so visually striking.
The Star Wars prequels were the best example of excessive CGI, Attack of the Clones in particular looks fucking horrible. All the actors move around awkwardly because they shot the movie on a small bluescreen set and they had nothing to really interact with.
The Star Wars prequels were the best example of excessive CGI, Attack of the Clones in particular looks fucking horrible. All the actors move around awkwardly because they shot the movie on a small bluescreen set and they had nothing to really interact with.
It just has to be used well. CGI can take us to some fantastical places, but it needs strong writing and performances to ground us there. I don't believe that non-CGI is always going to be superior to CGI. Interestingly, I think 100% CGI movies have done really well because they play to the strengths of CGI. When you combine the two, that's where it gets rough around the edges. But it's possible to use it effectively.
The mid 90's where the best era for special effects, CGI was only used when absolutely necessary. Someone like Titanic was a technical masterpiece with regards to it's blend of CGI and practical effects.
This is what I was referring to:
Awww thanks for listening!
ScraftyDevil
Banned
Amazing use of practical effects is one of the reasons why The Thing is my favourite horror movie of all time. Everything about the film is tense and deliberate, and a lot of the chilling atmosphere would be ruined by crappy CGI.
That's why it's such a gorram shame that the terribad 2011 prequel CG'd over all of the stunning anamatronics and costumes just so that "the monsters could attack faster." It's also missing the great performances and strong script of the original, but stronger effects would have at least made it worth a watch to see what the filmmakers did with the material.
Computer-generated imagery can be stunning if done right (see: both of the new Star Trek films and Tron: Legacy), but if it's bad, that's all most people are going to remember about the film. I'm actually really hyped for del Toro's Pacific Rim later this year because it looks to be the perfect fusion between modern and traditional effects (that plus the fact that the cinematography and action look to be spectacular ;P).
That's why it's such a gorram shame that the terribad 2011 prequel CG'd over all of the stunning anamatronics and costumes just so that "the monsters could attack faster." It's also missing the great performances and strong script of the original, but stronger effects would have at least made it worth a watch to see what the filmmakers did with the material.
Computer-generated imagery can be stunning if done right (see: both of the new Star Trek films and Tron: Legacy), but if it's bad, that's all most people are going to remember about the film. I'm actually really hyped for del Toro's Pacific Rim later this year because it looks to be the perfect fusion between modern and traditional effects (that plus the fact that the cinematography and action look to be spectacular ;P).
Thanks a lot! She's very cool, yeah
Im at the part where you guys are discussing how deep the game is and Im getting a little misty eyed reminiscing about it.
My allergies must be acting up today >.>
lol, Plinkett ruined the prequels for me. I can't watch them anymore and not think to myself: "This is shit."
Of course, I quote Plinkett and RLM all the time.
Haha, awesome. Currently working on a time for a certain other VO guest to come on the show soon!
Holding off on a new episode this Friday because people are convinced P5 is getting announced in the next week or so.
Oh, is that why? Alright.
Well, that's good because I am on-call this weekend again. (I switched so I could go away the weekend I was originally on-call!)
So..... yeah. >_>
Looking forward to it.
I have some catching up to do so take your time!
Xbone has a TV focus...
Persona 4 has a TV focus...
P5 Xbone exclusive confirmed!
It is not that Persona 5 is a lie, it is that you are the lie itself..... :O
TurnipFritters
Member
Looking forward to it.
I have some catching up to do so take your time!
Xbone has a TV focus...
Persona 4 has a TV focus...
P5 Xbone exclusive confirmed!
but p4 is not p5
TurnipFritters
Member
p5 is, however, dog-focused and they're gonna piggyback on that sweet mocap dog technology that call of duty is using.
Let's positive thinking Dantis-kun!
Dantis is just looking forward to his labby icon. :3
Panel for for next one was pretty much entirely new people anyways.
You need to talk more mang!
Panel for for next one was pretty much entirely new people anyways.
You need to talk more mang!
I think it was the "no protagonist" part that got me the most. It was like, I knew this was weird... but now I can articulate why!
It also helped me to realize why Final Fantasy X's story is so horrible: There's no protagonist. Or, at least, it focuses on the wrong one. FFX and The Phantom Menace have a lot of weird similarities to me.
TurnipFritters
Member
yuna is the protagonist of final fantasy x
TurnipFritters
Member
Developed by Toriyama with Nomura character design.
Try to image!
shin megami tensei iv's designs for rangda, lilith and cerberus + a baby
SloaneRisette
Member
Corgis freak me out. Why are their legs so little?!
TurnipFritters
Member
corgis aren't the most terrifying dogs...
buddha0991
Member
^How's Pugu-Kun doin
Law - Dantis
Neutral- Keiichi
Chaos- TurnipFritters
Law - Dantis
Neutral- Keiichi
Chaos- TurnipFritters
TurnipFritters
Member
puguu~kun is still bein' puguu~kun
i am true neutral i go both ways
I call dibs on Neutral Good/Chaotic Good!
What?
buddha0991
Member
There is no good or evil in megaten, only a million shades of gray. Light-Chaos here
SloaneRisette
Member
I'll pick whichever one of these Sophia doesn't end up taking.
TurnipFritters
Member
alignment isn't a pokemon starter
SloaneRisette
Member
Never said that dawg, but I fit both of those rather well too.
Tidus = Anakin.
Both stories focus on these characters when they are not, in fact, actually the main characters. As Turnip pointed out, the main character would be closer to Yuna, but even then, it's kind of a mix as to who they wanted the main character to be.
Both trended to use excessive GCI dazzle in place of a solid story, and most scenes are pretty frivolous and exist only for square to show off a pretty little cutscene that their team created.
Ultimately, no, FFX is not as bad as The Phantom Menace. And I understand that a lot of people really like the story of X. But really, the story is all over the place because some creative egos went a little out of control.
EDIT: Also, I'm on the law side, with all the assholery that implies.
- Status