My obsession with certain games, and addiction to certain book series' probably relates directly to my ability to relate to, sympathize with or even respect the characters that are portrayed. While I have a hard time enjoying books or movies with the end-all-be-all-bad-ass, I do (as many others do) gravitate towards the unlikely, or reluctant hero. Snake doesn't really fit any specific category, but is more like a end-all-be-all-bad-ass-unlikely-reluctant hero.
If you haven't played the games, only the first third of that statement will make sense to you, unless you haven't heard anything about it, or seen a commercial, then you don't give two shits about what I'm saying.
In any case, it's an interesting turn of events that this game had been so all encompassing that I haven't written a blog entry since the release date. The very date my last blog entry was (when I mounted the kitchen pc) the same night I stood outside with people much more talkative and annoying than I to play a game I'd been waiting for 3 and a half years for.
Now that it's over (and I've beat the game more than 4 times at this point), I'm not sure what there is left to say except that it was like losing a friend.
Now that everything is over, it seems like there is nothing left. I still play the game online, as there is an online component, but it doesn't quite compare. After 20 years of mystery, excitement and double crossings (of course, I still have the original NES cartridge), it really is the end of an era.
16 June 2008
12 June 2008
King of Procrastination
I work in phases. Kind of like the moon, but a lot lazier. Namely a "when-I-feel-like-it" basis.
I have a hard time faulting myself for this method. It doesn't agree with the business world, truth be told, however it does prevent me from putting out some really bad work.
One thing that I've been avoiding like the plague or the stinky kid in elementary school is the kitchen computer. Not so much building it, as installing it.
It'd been built for a while, and Gina even bought a touch screen monitor to make it all snazzy and what not. Months had gone by and my initial installation date rolled on. This time, not so much from laziness (well, it was there, too), but from ignorance.
One thing I should mention, if I were to have evaluated this house when it was built, I would have had to have them do it all over again. There are short cuts everywhere you look. Calling the spacing between studs non-standard would be like saying Gilbert Gottfried is kind of annoying. The wall it was mounted on has two studs, where the "doorway" opens and where the wall meets a corner. The electrical wiring is hanging out, so everything had to be done around it.
My buddy made some promises to help, but these grand plans never came to fruition, instead, last weekend (on another failed attempt to rendezvous with my friend), I made it my goal to finish this damned project for once and for all). Here are the final results:
That's right. Who's got a huge ass computer in their kitchen?
I am a mushroom cloud makin' mothafucker, mothafucker.
I have a hard time faulting myself for this method. It doesn't agree with the business world, truth be told, however it does prevent me from putting out some really bad work.
One thing that I've been avoiding like the plague or the stinky kid in elementary school is the kitchen computer. Not so much building it, as installing it.
It'd been built for a while, and Gina even bought a touch screen monitor to make it all snazzy and what not. Months had gone by and my initial installation date rolled on. This time, not so much from laziness (well, it was there, too), but from ignorance.
One thing I should mention, if I were to have evaluated this house when it was built, I would have had to have them do it all over again. There are short cuts everywhere you look. Calling the spacing between studs non-standard would be like saying Gilbert Gottfried is kind of annoying. The wall it was mounted on has two studs, where the "doorway" opens and where the wall meets a corner. The electrical wiring is hanging out, so everything had to be done around it.
My buddy made some promises to help, but these grand plans never came to fruition, instead, last weekend (on another failed attempt to rendezvous with my friend), I made it my goal to finish this damned project for once and for all). Here are the final results:
That's right. Who's got a huge ass computer in their kitchen?
I am a mushroom cloud makin' mothafucker, mothafucker.
02 June 2008
Career Paths
When you're young, you're full of ideals. Some of them are placed there by your parents, some you acquire along the way.
What did you want to be when you were growing up? Chances are, if you're like the other 98% of us, you're not doing it today. Maybe you realized that whatever it was that you wanted to do was absolutely no fun at all. Maybe you realized that the chances of your being able to do it was close to nil. Maybe you smoked too much pot in high school. Who knows?
Just the same, here you are.
When I was younger, I wanted to be a cop. Then I wanted to be an astronaut... then a lawyer (you can blame my mom for that). Then sometime around high school I didn't want to be anything. And now that I'm in the real world, and I've done enough different "skilled" jobs to make a Con-artist sick (all without a college education, I might proudly add), I think I've come full circle.
But that's another story.
There was a time around the 5th grade, when Nintendo Power was at the height of it's popularity, I was a student of Tracey Elementary School, a girl named Anna had my attentions, and I had hers (though I was too stupid to make use of them). Awkwardly, one of my better friends at the time was her brother, whom I will not name, though we had much in common, and often traded nintendo games with each other.
The prolific "Nintendo Power" we were so fond of would make no impression as a serious gaming magazine these days, but gaming, still technically in its infancy, was a bit of a different world. Authors of reviews would offer primitive descriptions of games with fancy details about levels to prove that they'd actually played them. What constituted a good game was a finer line than today when more was left to the imagination that the graphics hardware.
Still, you'd dream of a job where you'd get paid to write down your thoughts regarding a specific video game title. Getting paid to play games? Who wouldn't want that? Since you currently pay to play games, it was a trifecta of awesomeness. You didn't have a crappy job, you played games, and you got paid to play them.
Of course, whenever we did get the idea to review games, it seems we weren't quite eloquent enough to hold our own attentions, much less that of the reader.
Still, there were those of us that would try. And fail.
The videos below show a nineties era game review. Notice how in the first one, regarding Goldeneye, he states that the game is too hard, and that the game gets boring, and that he wants more cutscenes. Also note that he says he didn't play multiplayer, and that nobody buys a game for multiplayer.
Then think about how Goldeneye ushered in a new era of multiplayer games, and changed the shape of party gaming.
Now watch this:
Then watch this (which has nothing to do with goldeneye).
About halfway thru this guy's review does he say something so surprising I had to stop the video and listen for it again:
It all makes me think I should have gone and done it anyway.
Still, here's more of this crappy review company, in case you're interested in revisiting the past. (If you want to get a look at the guy whose annoying voice you've been listening to, try this link.)
What did you want to be when you were growing up? Chances are, if you're like the other 98% of us, you're not doing it today. Maybe you realized that whatever it was that you wanted to do was absolutely no fun at all. Maybe you realized that the chances of your being able to do it was close to nil. Maybe you smoked too much pot in high school. Who knows?
Just the same, here you are.
When I was younger, I wanted to be a cop. Then I wanted to be an astronaut... then a lawyer (you can blame my mom for that). Then sometime around high school I didn't want to be anything. And now that I'm in the real world, and I've done enough different "skilled" jobs to make a Con-artist sick (all without a college education, I might proudly add), I think I've come full circle.
But that's another story.
There was a time around the 5th grade, when Nintendo Power was at the height of it's popularity, I was a student of Tracey Elementary School, a girl named Anna had my attentions, and I had hers (though I was too stupid to make use of them). Awkwardly, one of my better friends at the time was her brother, whom I will not name, though we had much in common, and often traded nintendo games with each other.
The prolific "Nintendo Power" we were so fond of would make no impression as a serious gaming magazine these days, but gaming, still technically in its infancy, was a bit of a different world. Authors of reviews would offer primitive descriptions of games with fancy details about levels to prove that they'd actually played them. What constituted a good game was a finer line than today when more was left to the imagination that the graphics hardware.
Still, you'd dream of a job where you'd get paid to write down your thoughts regarding a specific video game title. Getting paid to play games? Who wouldn't want that? Since you currently pay to play games, it was a trifecta of awesomeness. You didn't have a crappy job, you played games, and you got paid to play them.
Of course, whenever we did get the idea to review games, it seems we weren't quite eloquent enough to hold our own attentions, much less that of the reader.
Still, there were those of us that would try. And fail.
The videos below show a nineties era game review. Notice how in the first one, regarding Goldeneye, he states that the game is too hard, and that the game gets boring, and that he wants more cutscenes. Also note that he says he didn't play multiplayer, and that nobody buys a game for multiplayer.
Then think about how Goldeneye ushered in a new era of multiplayer games, and changed the shape of party gaming.
Now watch this:
Then watch this (which has nothing to do with goldeneye).
About halfway thru this guy's review does he say something so surprising I had to stop the video and listen for it again:
It all makes me think I should have gone and done it anyway.
Still, here's more of this crappy review company, in case you're interested in revisiting the past. (If you want to get a look at the guy whose annoying voice you've been listening to, try this link.)
19 May 2008
Two for the price of one
Before I start, I'd like to say that I may be maintaining a pace of about one a week, sometimes it's less than that. I am neither apologetic about this, nor am I remorseful.
This weekend I found time to watch a movie I'd been avoiding for a few weeks now.
I suppose if you know me, you know my attachment to horrible, or at least moderately bad movies. A couple of examples? Wing Commander. Hackers. Between those two, if my punishment in hell was to watch the same two horrid movies for the rest of eternity, this would be closer to purgatory for me.
Don't think I could last? I might surprise you. I've seen Wing Commander more than 30 times. 4 of those times in theaters. When I get home at the end of the day, it's a bit of a chore not to plop down and watch it, even knowing that they threw away all the good bits of the Wing Commander saga and raped what was left... And you already know how much I love that series.
But there is some charm to bad movies. And I don't know what it is, but I almost prefer them to good ones. The good ones are so serious. And as serious a person I may be, I do enjoy the occasional chuckle. That's why I sat down and watched "In the Name of the King: a Dungeon Siege tale".
Ahh.... Uwe Boll. The bringer of such impeccable masterpieces, like; House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, BloodRayne and most recently In the Name of the King. (There is also a Postal movie that I really look forward to viewing.)
Boll is revered in the movie and gaming communities as a destroyer of Intellectual Properties, but the truth is, I think I'm a fan of his work.
Granted, I think it's hard to find anything redeemable in House of the Dead, but even his work in Alone in the Dark showed promise. Not everyone is a Wunderkind, but Boll has touched a very specific audience in a negative way. He is constantly criticized as a director who has no respect for the games he is translating, but I really don't think he sees it that way.
His latest production "In the Name of the King" is... interesting. There are things that I want to like about the movie, and things that I can't stand. I feel that one of the improvements Boll could make is to have someone rewrite the dialogue in a more natural manner. While "In the Name of the King" appears to take place in some fantasy land reminiscent of Scotland and England, a lot of the dialogue is uneven, in some places seeming clumsy and unwarranted (to move the plot along), in other places, far too elaborate (though this is usually where you gather the best quotes).
One of the greatest improvements I could attribute to Boll is that he appears to be doing his homework. His cinematography is vastly improved over the span of his American work and the extra effort really shows. While I think his stage crew could probably do more to integrate the stage setup in to the shots Boll sets up, I get the impression that Boll does his exposition shots after he films on stage. His light work has also come along way.
Hands down, the largest detractor from his work appears to be a shared responsibility: Casting and acting.
I'm not sure what they do to cast the parts out, if there are any feelers involved, or if they simply have someone in mind for the part when they write it and go balls out to get that person (which may be the case, as Boll casts many repeat actors), but I wonder if it might help to do screen tests with the actors to ensure that they mesh well. (A perfect example is the absolute lack of chemistry between Christian Slater--Whom I have a great amount of respect for-- and Tara Reid--Who may have finally gotten her plastic surgery fixed). The chemistry mismatch is certainly apparent, even as far as child actors go (Colin Ford as Zeph made me wish the kid was dead--I know, picking on a child actor isn't fair, but this is my opinion God Dammit).
Matthew Lillard and Ray Liotta stand out from the pack here, I'm feeling generous, so here's an entire section. I think if I were an actor, I would prefer not to be typecast, but it seems opposites attract here. Liotta, who may be typecast as the hard-ass italian guy who kills people, is instead the insane wizard guy who kills people by proxy. Lillard, who usually plays a bumbling idiot with redeeming qualities, plays a bumbling, power hungry idiot, with a lack of redeeming qualities. Lillard does stand out as the only person in the cast who attempted to change their usual delivery (in his case spouting lines thru his bottom row of teeth), and in some scenes attempts what might be construed (in a court of law) as an accent change.
No other main character in this movie does so. And the accents appear all over, including the highlight (a russian chambermaid?) whose accent is so unbearably bad, you have to imagine they either asked a non-speaking extra to take a line, or that she's just a really terrible Russian actor.
The rest of the actors in the movie sort of phone in their performances, and I get the impression that a lot of the actors were reading directly off of cue cards, though there are always exceptions: I felt Jason Statham and Ron Perlman actually worked quite well together, and Terrance Kelly made significant improvements over his performance in "Bloodrayne". Brian J White was also a positive mark on this movie, taking a performance past what is written in the script.
Overall, I don't have much bad to say about this movie. While I could go on about it's flaws, you could also dissect a movie like "The Matrix" in the same manner. That's not to say that these two movies are on the same caliber, but I might even venture to say I enjoyed "In the Name of the King" more so then I enjoyed "The Matrix Reloaded". I also see promise in Boll's future. And while I understand that the animosity a lot of the community shows is from bad blood, I call for them to remember movies like "Super Mario Bros", "Double Dragon", "Street Fighter" and "Mortal Kombat Annihilation"... even "Doom", and remember that Boll was nowhere to be seen for those movies.
*Disclaimer, I enjoyed all the movies mentioned at the end with the exception of "Mortal Kombat Annihilation".
This weekend I found time to watch a movie I'd been avoiding for a few weeks now.
I suppose if you know me, you know my attachment to horrible, or at least moderately bad movies. A couple of examples? Wing Commander. Hackers. Between those two, if my punishment in hell was to watch the same two horrid movies for the rest of eternity, this would be closer to purgatory for me.
Don't think I could last? I might surprise you. I've seen Wing Commander more than 30 times. 4 of those times in theaters. When I get home at the end of the day, it's a bit of a chore not to plop down and watch it, even knowing that they threw away all the good bits of the Wing Commander saga and raped what was left... And you already know how much I love that series.
But there is some charm to bad movies. And I don't know what it is, but I almost prefer them to good ones. The good ones are so serious. And as serious a person I may be, I do enjoy the occasional chuckle. That's why I sat down and watched "In the Name of the King: a Dungeon Siege tale".
Ahh.... Uwe Boll. The bringer of such impeccable masterpieces, like; House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, BloodRayne and most recently In the Name of the King. (There is also a Postal movie that I really look forward to viewing.)
Boll is revered in the movie and gaming communities as a destroyer of Intellectual Properties, but the truth is, I think I'm a fan of his work.
Granted, I think it's hard to find anything redeemable in House of the Dead, but even his work in Alone in the Dark showed promise. Not everyone is a Wunderkind, but Boll has touched a very specific audience in a negative way. He is constantly criticized as a director who has no respect for the games he is translating, but I really don't think he sees it that way.
His latest production "In the Name of the King" is... interesting. There are things that I want to like about the movie, and things that I can't stand. I feel that one of the improvements Boll could make is to have someone rewrite the dialogue in a more natural manner. While "In the Name of the King" appears to take place in some fantasy land reminiscent of Scotland and England, a lot of the dialogue is uneven, in some places seeming clumsy and unwarranted (to move the plot along), in other places, far too elaborate (though this is usually where you gather the best quotes).
One of the greatest improvements I could attribute to Boll is that he appears to be doing his homework. His cinematography is vastly improved over the span of his American work and the extra effort really shows. While I think his stage crew could probably do more to integrate the stage setup in to the shots Boll sets up, I get the impression that Boll does his exposition shots after he films on stage. His light work has also come along way.
Hands down, the largest detractor from his work appears to be a shared responsibility: Casting and acting.
I'm not sure what they do to cast the parts out, if there are any feelers involved, or if they simply have someone in mind for the part when they write it and go balls out to get that person (which may be the case, as Boll casts many repeat actors), but I wonder if it might help to do screen tests with the actors to ensure that they mesh well. (A perfect example is the absolute lack of chemistry between Christian Slater--Whom I have a great amount of respect for-- and Tara Reid--Who may have finally gotten her plastic surgery fixed). The chemistry mismatch is certainly apparent, even as far as child actors go (Colin Ford as Zeph made me wish the kid was dead--I know, picking on a child actor isn't fair, but this is my opinion God Dammit).
Matthew Lillard and Ray Liotta stand out from the pack here, I'm feeling generous, so here's an entire section. I think if I were an actor, I would prefer not to be typecast, but it seems opposites attract here. Liotta, who may be typecast as the hard-ass italian guy who kills people, is instead the insane wizard guy who kills people by proxy. Lillard, who usually plays a bumbling idiot with redeeming qualities, plays a bumbling, power hungry idiot, with a lack of redeeming qualities. Lillard does stand out as the only person in the cast who attempted to change their usual delivery (in his case spouting lines thru his bottom row of teeth), and in some scenes attempts what might be construed (in a court of law) as an accent change.
No other main character in this movie does so. And the accents appear all over, including the highlight (a russian chambermaid?) whose accent is so unbearably bad, you have to imagine they either asked a non-speaking extra to take a line, or that she's just a really terrible Russian actor.
The rest of the actors in the movie sort of phone in their performances, and I get the impression that a lot of the actors were reading directly off of cue cards, though there are always exceptions: I felt Jason Statham and Ron Perlman actually worked quite well together, and Terrance Kelly made significant improvements over his performance in "Bloodrayne". Brian J White was also a positive mark on this movie, taking a performance past what is written in the script.
Overall, I don't have much bad to say about this movie. While I could go on about it's flaws, you could also dissect a movie like "The Matrix" in the same manner. That's not to say that these two movies are on the same caliber, but I might even venture to say I enjoyed "In the Name of the King" more so then I enjoyed "The Matrix Reloaded". I also see promise in Boll's future. And while I understand that the animosity a lot of the community shows is from bad blood, I call for them to remember movies like "Super Mario Bros", "Double Dragon", "Street Fighter" and "Mortal Kombat Annihilation"... even "Doom", and remember that Boll was nowhere to be seen for those movies.
*Disclaimer, I enjoyed all the movies mentioned at the end with the exception of "Mortal Kombat Annihilation".
12 May 2008
4 minutes to write this song
I find myself listening to the radio a lot more than I used to in recent years. Mostly, the local hip hop station (B96), and only because we enjoy listening to it. It seems that a lot of Hip hop music offers absolutely no content beyond what you've already heard before. Realistically speaking, we're listening to urban techno.
I say a lot about music, and they only thing I can derive from all this dissatisfaction is that I must not like music very much. I suppose that makes me a critic. But don't you ever listen to a song and think to yourself that maybe... just maybe you could have written that song for yourself?
Maybe you could have... especially when the best you could do for a chorus is "We only got 4 minutes to save the world".
Maybe I'm bitter. Maybe it's because I don't have the millions of dollars or the ambition to take a shitty idea farther than the beginning of the creative process.
I do the same shit with movie ideas... I think of an idea and I throw it out because maybe that idea is too stupid for anyone to take seriously... but then we get movies like the new Adam Sandler flick, You don't mess with the Zohan. But that's not what I'm really here to complain about. I should stick to the topic... that music sucks.
And that I'm not funny.
But there is one song that's really struck a ... I'm really sorry... struck a chord with me. I can't stop listening to it.
And it's folk music.
There has to be something extremely wrong with me at this point. I've probably listened to it 20 times today. But there's a charming quality to it. It's unassuming, and the "hook", as I've weaponized to criticize so many other songs with is delightfully unassuming. It's a slight rhythm change and a bit of a musical cliffhanger with an unresolved chord. Mrs. Gunz thinks I like it because it seems to be a song about just accepting life, and that's my mantra.
The song, while basic, maybe a bit over-produced, but that's bound to happen when it takes 9 years to put out a new album after a battle with cancer.
The people who are prone to read this blog won't know who I'm talking about. His name is John Prine, and his album Fair and Square may not be for everyone. Chances are, if you're reading this, you probably won't even like the song I'm referring to, which is called "Clay Pigeons", you'll probably make like the misses did and say, "it sounds nice".
Just the same, give it a listen, you may find yourself just as surprised as I did when I caught Prine's performance on PBS HD accidentally on a Saturday morning. But it's the least I can do for someone who found and produced a song by legendary songwriter (Blaze Foley, but I think you'll like Prine's version better), to make you listen to it.
I say a lot about music, and they only thing I can derive from all this dissatisfaction is that I must not like music very much. I suppose that makes me a critic. But don't you ever listen to a song and think to yourself that maybe... just maybe you could have written that song for yourself?
Maybe you could have... especially when the best you could do for a chorus is "We only got 4 minutes to save the world".
Maybe I'm bitter. Maybe it's because I don't have the millions of dollars or the ambition to take a shitty idea farther than the beginning of the creative process.
I do the same shit with movie ideas... I think of an idea and I throw it out because maybe that idea is too stupid for anyone to take seriously... but then we get movies like the new Adam Sandler flick, You don't mess with the Zohan. But that's not what I'm really here to complain about. I should stick to the topic... that music sucks.
And that I'm not funny.
But there is one song that's really struck a ... I'm really sorry... struck a chord with me. I can't stop listening to it.
And it's folk music.
There has to be something extremely wrong with me at this point. I've probably listened to it 20 times today. But there's a charming quality to it. It's unassuming, and the "hook", as I've weaponized to criticize so many other songs with is delightfully unassuming. It's a slight rhythm change and a bit of a musical cliffhanger with an unresolved chord. Mrs. Gunz thinks I like it because it seems to be a song about just accepting life, and that's my mantra.
The song, while basic, maybe a bit over-produced, but that's bound to happen when it takes 9 years to put out a new album after a battle with cancer.
The people who are prone to read this blog won't know who I'm talking about. His name is John Prine, and his album Fair and Square may not be for everyone. Chances are, if you're reading this, you probably won't even like the song I'm referring to, which is called "Clay Pigeons", you'll probably make like the misses did and say, "it sounds nice".
Just the same, give it a listen, you may find yourself just as surprised as I did when I caught Prine's performance on PBS HD accidentally on a Saturday morning. But it's the least I can do for someone who found and produced a song by legendary songwriter (Blaze Foley, but I think you'll like Prine's version better), to make you listen to it.
29 April 2008
For Lack of Controversy
Today, after a short... 6 month delay, Grand Theft Auto 4 was released to millions of patient fans. And some not so patient ones. The game was leaked about a week before.
None-the-less, the game is out, and is just now beginning a shit-storm of responses from "journalists" who couldn't think themselves out of a wet paper bag. These journalists grew up in an atmosphere that taught them knee jerk reactions were the quickest ways to receive attention, and scaring the shit out of your public is the best way to gain respect from your public.
Unfortunately for them, as print news goes the way of the dodo, and the general public has discovered out that while your refrigerator could kill you and everyone you love, the simple fact that it hasn't done so yet is a fantastic reason not to tune in at eleven to watch someone who is paid millions of dollars to look good and read from a prompt talk down to you for 2 hours, and look concerned about the fact that crime is on the rise (even though it's been on a decline since the introduction of porn).
But I suppose any attention is good attention these days, right?
The debate seems to be the same. The same generation that was told that Rock and Roll was poisoning their minds and that violent movies and pornography and marijuana would all make them soulless killers, as if killing didn't exist before, is doing exactly what they said that wouldn't and they've all become their fathers.
I wonder what Cain watched on HBO that got him all angry.
None-the-less, the game is out, and is just now beginning a shit-storm of responses from "journalists" who couldn't think themselves out of a wet paper bag. These journalists grew up in an atmosphere that taught them knee jerk reactions were the quickest ways to receive attention, and scaring the shit out of your public is the best way to gain respect from your public.
Unfortunately for them, as print news goes the way of the dodo, and the general public has discovered out that while your refrigerator could kill you and everyone you love, the simple fact that it hasn't done so yet is a fantastic reason not to tune in at eleven to watch someone who is paid millions of dollars to look good and read from a prompt talk down to you for 2 hours, and look concerned about the fact that crime is on the rise (even though it's been on a decline since the introduction of porn).
But I suppose any attention is good attention these days, right?
The debate seems to be the same. The same generation that was told that Rock and Roll was poisoning their minds and that violent movies and pornography and marijuana would all make them soulless killers, as if killing didn't exist before, is doing exactly what they said that wouldn't and they've all become their fathers.
I wonder what Cain watched on HBO that got him all angry.
28 April 2008
Nothing to Add
I'm feeling lazy. My post counts come in around 1 a week. Don't like it? Well, I can't help it, and complaining really won't help.
I'm addicted to two things right now: GTA 4 and Metal Gear Online. Both are fantastic, but MGO is definitely compensates the purchase of the Playstation 3.
When I'm not playing games, or ignoring movies that lay dormant on my media center (ones that I promised myself I would watch, even), I do spend a lot of time on social networking sites (like digg, Fark, or even 4chan). I also frequent a lot of blogs that I run in to when stumbling. I find a lot of interesting subjects that are written about, but that's not what I was here to complain about today.
It's the comments. I rarely get comments, so maybe I'm not an authority on what comments are supposed to be, but I do comment frequently, and if the only thing that I have to offer in addition to the post is "Awesome!" or "Beautiful!" or "HAHAHAHA!", I don't fucking write.
Now, that's not so bad, but people, really? Is that all you have to say? Is that all you can really think to say? Are you really so vapid?
I like it when people tell parallel stories... or have something to cite, but I think it really speaks for the intelligence of us as a society, that in essence and anonymity, we're all yes-men.
I'm addicted to two things right now: GTA 4 and Metal Gear Online. Both are fantastic, but MGO is definitely compensates the purchase of the Playstation 3.
When I'm not playing games, or ignoring movies that lay dormant on my media center (ones that I promised myself I would watch, even), I do spend a lot of time on social networking sites (like digg, Fark, or even 4chan). I also frequent a lot of blogs that I run in to when stumbling. I find a lot of interesting subjects that are written about, but that's not what I was here to complain about today.
It's the comments. I rarely get comments, so maybe I'm not an authority on what comments are supposed to be, but I do comment frequently, and if the only thing that I have to offer in addition to the post is "Awesome!" or "Beautiful!" or "HAHAHAHA!", I don't fucking write.
Now, that's not so bad, but people, really? Is that all you have to say? Is that all you can really think to say? Are you really so vapid?
I like it when people tell parallel stories... or have something to cite, but I think it really speaks for the intelligence of us as a society, that in essence and anonymity, we're all yes-men.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)