Greatoneshere

Whelp, they better go grovel and get them back.

Given the theoretical re-licensing nightmare this could have been, I'm glad we're getting Dante at all - I had him in my party for a lot of the end game the first time around, and it'd be cool to have him again, though playing as in-universe character Raidou would be awesome as well. Now with Atlus doing PC, can we expect a PC port?

I know but going by their average development time they should have had a game ready by February 2020 at the latest. But I agree with you. Again, they should be but all bets are sort of off if one goes by conventional rules/methods, so I do ultimately agree with you. Yep, this, basically.

Grosse Pointe Blank is a severely underdiscussed film. Great movie, haven't seen it in ages, probably time for a rewatch.

Beyond Astro's Playroom, I'm not sure any first-party game is confirmed definitively for launch yet, but I would expect, given the average development times of the studios making these games in general and to make sure Sony has at least a semi-strong launch, these games should be ready to go this November/December: -Astro's Playroom -Gran Turismo 7 -Horizon Forbidden West (it won't be ready, but Guerrilla Games' timeline says it's already past time ) -Spider-Man: Miles Morales -Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart (with this being Insomniac, and Spider-Man: MM being more of a stand-alone expansion, I think both coming out at launch is possible) -Demon's Souls remake (it's already past time for Bluepoint Games' next game) -Returnal (it's already past time as well for Housemarque's next game) But going off a specific studio's average development time from their entire previous resume only indicates some of the picture (though it does help somewhat in terms of being predictive) - with COVID-19 and a new generation of hardware for developers to deal with, between the two typical development timelines may be artificially extended beyond their norms. I took that into account with my expectations and so I still expect this launch line-up from Sony (or something close to it) but I can't say completely for sure. I would be very satisfied and reasonable expectations met if my aforementioned list was the dialed in launch line-up.

Not that it is by any means definitive but going off of the critic and user ratings on metacritic, it appears this is the consensus from best to worst (with Blood Omen 2 the only one being outright "bad"). There's no question there was a drop-off in quality after Blood Omen 1 and Soul Reaver 1. Soul Reaver 2 and Defiance are pretty evenly matched and are good enough but are a clear step down from the first two games. Blood Omen 2 has always been the odd one out. -Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver -Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain -Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 2 -Legacy of Kain: Defiance -Blood Omen 2: Legacy of Kain

It's confusing because separately Del Toro co-wrote a film for director Robert Zemeckis, which is a film, titled The Witches which comes out later this year or next. So you have Wizards: Tales of Arcadia coming out (10 episode, one season animated TV show sequel) and also The Witches, a full-length live-action feature film, unrelated and separate.

I'm a fan of the whole franchise (Blood Omen 2 being the . . . weird one) but without Amy Hennig I just don't see Crystal Dynamics returning to Legacy of Kain in any real, proper way (as much as I'd love it). All we got were horrible potential spin-offs like Dead Sun and Nosgoth. But yes, Crystal Dynamics should be pumping out triple AAA Legacy of Kain and Tomb Raider games, not . . . this. I am surprised though, I really liked Soul Reaver 2 and most seem too? Surprised - if you don't count Soul Reaver 2 you probably don't count Blood Omen 2 either (though that's in an alternate timeline anyway). Man, imagine a Dark Souls-like or Tsushima-style open-world like (or God of War semi-open world-type) Legacy of Kain remake combining Blood Omen 1 and Soul Reaver 1's worlds, towns, etc.

Crystal Dynamics, imagine Eidos Montreal - they aren't just Square Enix's whipping boy, they're also Crystal Dynamics'. They could have been making a new Thief or Deus Ex game (which I imagine is absolutely what they want to do) but instead were forced to finish out the Tomb Raider trilogy for Crystal Dynamics by making Shadow of the Tomb Raider (this is after providing support on the first two reboot Tomb Raider games for Crystal Dynamics) and then help them with this game as part of a deal with Marvel through Square Enix. As a person who was a huge fan of Human Revolution and Mankind Divided and saw potential with their Thief reboot, it's a shame.

Just to be clear for others, Wizards is not a movie, but the third TV series in Guillermo Del Toro's Tales of Arcadia series. First was Trollhunters (52 episodes), then 3Below (26 episodes), and now Wizards (10 episodes). After Wizards will come a final film to cap it all off, Trollhunters: Rise of the Titans. And while Del Toro is an executive producer on the series, beyond co-writing 4 episodes and co-directing 4 episodes across three different shows (two in Trollhunters, one in 3Below, and two in Wizards) he isn't that involved - it's much more the Hageman duo and Marc Guggenheim who showran and wrote episodes for the series (and their writing team as well as the directing team at the animation studio). He's not even involved in the movie at all beyond an executive producer credit. Just to be clear about Del Toro's level of involvement.

Same, just did all trophies, platinum'd, and got all in-game collectibles and items too. I had no idea about the bowing mechanic for one trophy. The only thing I didn't do was buy absolutely every dye for every item, but I got most of them. I did like that when you finally do everything in-game, the game gives you one last message which was cool. Great game, and they took all the good things from Infamous: Second Son and expanded on them whilst fixing everything that was problematic in that game.

I'm just glad it's the original version director Josh Boone wanted to make. In fact, no reshoots ever happened according to him, even the regular kind of reshoots that blockbusters normally have. The New Mutants could be very interesting, at least.

Pretty much this. I have no idea what to expect out of Garth Davis but he's a good director. Otherwise, I guess we'll see. Still would like Daft Punk back . . .

Yeesh, that's concerning.

My wife and I like being in the world of Middle-Earth, and we both stand by the fact that the Hobbit movies are a lot of fun. The extended editions are better because then it feels like you're in a LOTR TV show.

People acting like patches don't exist. Not that the game shouldn't be great/perfect at launch, but it's a PC game and a PC port at that - there'll be day one patches, etc. Sony's first hand at it, no less. Death Stranding may have launched better, but Kojima has released games on PC before (even with MGS5) and Death Stranding is newer, based on a modified version of Horizon's Decimus engine, and Death Stranding was always being prepped for a PC release, whereas with Horizon I'm sure this is very much retroactive. Older tech, not ever initially meant for PC, etc. It'll get there. Or should, at any rate, if Guerrilla Games is worth their salt. People be looking a gift hand in the mouth - we're getting Sony first party games on a non-Sony console/platform. This is huge. Let's take the wins we can get and build from there. Imagine if Mario or Zelda just started releasing on PC - a person's first thought wouldn't be: "holy shit!" it's "why isn't it a perfect port?" I'm very much of the former mindset, not the latter. Guess my standards are low.

Agree about ESB and TLJ being the best directed - though ROTJ and RO are no slouches. ANH is slower and thus more 70's, but it's also by design - as I said, Lucas was going for the tone and atmosphere and vibe, in part, on David Lean epics like Lawrence of Arabia - hence, in part, the setting of Tatooine in the first place. It's an old film, no question, but it's also intentionally slower is all (which I liked). The vibe carries over to ESB, less so with ROTJ. You'll just notice when you watch the OT vs. any of the other movies how quiet they often are. Just quiet scenes of beeps and boops and nothing happening before a dialogue scene or something kicks in. It's all very slow and methodical, especially by comparison to, like TROS, which felt like Star Wars on cocaine. Haha, also completely valid - I think with me it's often me trying to share something with her than anything else (otherwise I'd just go watch it on my own). If she's falling asleep, that's probably the same as her saying: "I'm out" and if I'm enjoying the film or whatever still, I will indeed continue without her (obviously I'm not going to keep making her watch).

Haha, this post is great. It's all good - I see the thinking, but yeah, franchises just build off of themselves too much. And my wife and I have a similar agreement when I'm testing the waters - if they don't dig the initial movie or movies, then we can give up. But fortunately, that's never happened - my wife even stuck through the Saw movies (all of em) when we did Halloween a few years ago. But it's very fair and needed (for them) to have such an agreement in place. Once they get invested in the mythology and the backstory and the connective tissue between films, they get hooked like a binge-worthy TV show and can't let go. It's why these franchises get so many movies in the first place, something about them gets people in most cases. Not that everyone is a fan of every franchise, but when viewed correctly it helps the franchises immeasurably.

Your entire post is a sentiment I've been echoing since TFA (yes, TFA, not TROS) came out. I also hate the prequels (yes, even now, they suck, despite others' reappraisals of it on the internet) but that was Lucas just sucking, but it was still Lucas and canon. But once I came out of TFA in theaters, I was like: "this is just like any other franchise now, Abrams has killed Star Wars" and while kids might like the Pirates of the Caribbean adventure of it all, it's not the OT. The feel, the epic David Lean inspired vibe of it all, was gone. I enjoy some of the new movies a lot, but it's not the same. It's just another franchise to me now. TLJ and RO were the closest I felt the new movies got to the old. And certain parts of The Mandalorian. Wow, I could have told you that'd be an awful idea haha. As a person who watches way too many movies, all my ex-gf's (and now my current wife as well) have all had to suffer my ways of watching things, but what they slowly learn is it's always to their benefit to maximize their enjoyment. My wife totally gets my methods now. Always production order, always. Regardless of prequels or whatever, stories build off of what came before. Writers can't create from what didn't exist. So a prequel like the Star Wars prequels presumes knowledge of the force because the OT already exists - even with the OT technically being sequels to the prequels the prequels presume understanding of the OT because that's what people know in real life. Production/release order! Yes, the movies are old, just tell her she'll enjoy the new movies more if she "suffers" the old ones first. At first the ex-gf's and my wife didn't get why I was so pushy about it, but once I got them through a few franchises they started to get it. My wife, for example, hadn't seen the Mission: Impossible movies but was interested in Mission: Impossible - Fallout based on the trailer (she was right to be interested). And I said: "we can't go until you've seen all the other ones" and she was like: "ugh, why?!" But, right before Fallout's release, we did indeed sit down and go through them all properly, etc. And when we watched Fallout, she was like: "yeah, I wouldn't have understood anything, it was way better this way" and I did the same for the MCU, the X-Men films, Jason Bourne, Fast & Furious, Riddick, everything. Always production order, and always include everything, is better, if you can. A good example is, if your relationship lasts, you can eventually do it a different way in the future. For instance, when my wife and I first dated, both of us being LOTR fans, we went through the LOTR trilogy, and then the Hobbit trilogy (all extended editions). Five years later, we returned to the series since we're fans, but this time, since we'd already seen them plenty of times, we did the Hobbit trilogy first and then the LOTR trilogy, and that was very cool in its own way, now that we'd seen it the "right" way. So you can always do Rogue One into Episode 4 someday! And the next time, she'll know what's up and be fully invested. In fact, my wife and I (both of us being big Star Wars fans) did just that, and it was cool as a connective story! But you gotta lay the groundwork with the correct initial viewing order first. Yep!

I think you point out an interesting part of this that I've also been thinking about. You're absolutely right there's a difference in understanding when it comes to "remakes" in the video game world and "remakes" when it comes to the TV/film world. Obviously, in both worlds direct comparisons are made, fans of the original or older work get butthurt, etc. For instance, the good example raised is Ocean's 11. The original was actually just an okay movie, so when Ocean's 11 remake came out everyone but serious Rat Pack fans (Sinatra and the gang starred in the original) felt the remake was better than the original (the remake is better). But movies also get the same conversation games get: "the original was better". They "changed too much" with the remake. The remake "didn't honor the original". The remake "was a remake in name only", etc. But the difference you call out is that in film and TV, changes and such are expected from the audience if they know it's a remake/reboot, and that's true. Remasters do exist in film (a shot-for-shot remake of a film) but it's rare and critics usually wonder why the director bothered (Gus Van Sant's remake of Pyscho and Michael Haneke's remake of his own Funny Games so it could be in English are two famous examples). In video games, we usually get remasters, not remakes. Remasters do change things, especially if code has to be rewritten as opposed to updated, but remasters usually need to be exactly like the old game, physics code and all, or fans will cry sweet death (and I get that, perfect coding within a game is everything). Remakes are a relatively rare and newer thing in video games, so people still just want the old game, but with amazing graphics and sound and cutscenes. So to change a lot is just something that isn't done, since remasters have to be like the original game they emulate and remakes were borne out of the idea of remasters in the gaming space to make more money off of older games and IP's and get them to new fans, not to re-tell the story (though that will happen regardless of remake, even Resident Evil 2 Remake and RE3R changed story stuff, though minimally). If you think about it, most video game remakes are remasters, just beautifully redone, and that's what audiences mostly want from games vs. movies. RE2R, RE3R, Black Mesa, Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Halo 1 and Halo 2 Anniversary, Yakuza Kiwami, Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) etc. are all remakes, not remasters, but in terms of story and characters, they are all essentially the same as the originals. Even Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, a game I really enjoyed, while a remake, was lambasted on release for it's over the top cutscenes, done by cult indie action Japanese film director Ryuhei Kitamura (whose films I enjoy a lot, and whose action panache I enjoyed in the cutscenes of Twin Snakes). But even with those over the top cutscenes, the story played out essentially the same. TL;DR - FF7R is one of the very first times, and definitely at the triple AAA blockbuster video game level, where a remake changed a lot, all at the end, as a twist, to an original game that was, unlike many video games, very story, plot, and character heavy to begin with. There's definitely a difference between movies and games, so it's an apt observation. I don't know the history, but I'm sure film went through this growing pain as well at some point I imagine with a film that did what FF7R did. I imagine if they remade the LOTR movies (which I'm sure they'll do someday) and at the end of Fellowship they changed a lot to indicate some crazy ass different shit ala FF7R, I imagine that'd be controversial, even as an understood remake, in the film space (to be clear, I liked FF7R's ending).

This is more accurate. Only "two" of the movies are good lol. The OP is ridiculous. Two of the movies are downright classics which will forever be remembered that forever changed the history of cinema in the same way that Sgt. Pepper did for music, in many ways. Two more are quite good, as you said, and I also very much enjoy RO. The prequels, Solo, and TFA/TROS are bad, with TFA having some redeeming qualities. And this. It's really not hard to understand the allure of cool worlds and mythologies. Space opera is an attractive setting and genre.

This is all correct. The original show ran from 1991 to 1996 and had 52 episodes (93 "segments"). The second series, Ren & Stimply: "Adult Party Cartoon", was indeed 6 episodes long overall, came out in 2003, and only 3 episodes ever aired (the 6 were subsequently released on DVD, etc.). John Kricfalusi was very invovled in this second show, co-writing 5 of the episodes and directing all 6 episodes.

I was so surprised to see John Wick 3 wasn't the end. Nice to see we're getting 4 and 5 at the same time at least. In all honesty it's probably because Covid has delayed things already and Keanu Reeves is starting to get a bit old for those action scenes.

Comparing it to Phase 1 movies is unfair - the formula Captain Marvel steals from wholesale over and over again are the standard MCU origin story template/formula used by the MCU previously. There's no question it's an improvement over Phase 1, but that's not surprising, it should be. But it still felt pretty bog standard. The best measure is how often are people rewatching this vs. Winter Soldier or Civil War? None of these movies will ever be Dunkirk or Logan or The Dark Knight, so the MCU's primary role is as pure blockbuster entertainment and rewatchability for the most part and little else.

I mean, this is Sony (and Guerrilla Games) getting its feet wet for the first time ever in the PC space. I have to say, it's great but just so strange to even see a Sony first party game on the PC in the first place that I'm grateful for that alone, port or no port. Death Stranding and FF7R were always coming to PC, but to now get Horizon Zero Dawn and MLB The Show 21 on PC as well - there's definitely a sea change afoot and I imagine each PC port from Sony will be better than the last.