![]() ![]() I wasn't excited to watch it, because I don't find McFarlane funny (as a writer/showrunner and especially not as an actor), and because I think I've only ever enjoyed maybe one sci-fi parody ever. I have to agree with both your general point and your specific regarding The Orville. Despite being somewhat of a comedic parody, like you say, they 'really captured every single aspect' that made star trek great. You can tell the people that made the Orville loved the hell out of the earlier star trek series and put a lot of care into small details that really made it feel like star trek, moreso than most newer actual star treks. That attention to detail is what makes games fun. Only the demo is available, but the author really captured every single aspect that made StarFox great. >Lately I played a game, Ex-Zodiac, which is a StarFox clone. After hearing what it was, I wasn't really interested, but finally i was pushed into watching it and I was immediately hooked and finished the first two seasons in a couple days. ![]() I've been recommended The Orville a bunch lately. Not to bash on them in any way and getting to my point. The series changed in ways I didn't enjoy. ![]() Around the time of enterprise, then going on to the reboot and new series i'd lost interest in star trek. To apply what you're saying to a different media. ![]() Lately I played a game, Ex-Zodiac, which is a StarFox clone. Because they are unable to capture the whole experience. I've read countless articles and postmortems of the style "why X is successful", and then seen games that follow those documents closely and produce a horrible game. For a experience to be gratifying, everything needs to work together. If you go to a 5 star hotel where everything is perfect but when you try to use the shower it doesn't work, your overall rating will be 1 star. You can have a great game, but if it's unstable, has annoying sound effects, or constant monetization related nagging, or a toxic community or some cringy voice actor or soundtrack or excessive unskippable cutscenes with irrelevant stupid dialogs. High frame rate, stability, good quality animations, color palette/art style/fonts that are consistent with the game fiction, UI usability, soundtrack, community, abscence of cheaters. My criticism towards game designers is that they often analyze games from an abstract perspective, leaving out important details that contribute to the success of the game: It's hard to imagine any answer could get me to stop tbqh. While the uncertainty is kind of fun, I'm really excited to be nearing a moment to get a firmer answer. Just between you and me, it could go either way. It's like a super position between a catastrophic, financially ruinous midlife crisis - or being some eccentric who knew he would be alright all along. Is my mettle enough to survive without evermore accepting the indignities that come with fealty to someone else's banner? Someone else's dreams? The trickle of likes and follows have been a resounding "maybe! We're bewildered but intrigued. ~Every other day when I post a little 30 second video of progress on twitter, it's like a question to society asking if I'm good enough, if I should be allowed to go to the dentist, maybe buy new glasses some day as a reward. It's an interesting feeling to be in the midst of it. It's still an open question if society will appreciate what I can deliver enough to support me continuing to do it. I chose to do that so my vision would shine through (and so the art style would have some core consistency!). Reading what you just said is heartening, I've received some shade about how inefficient it is to do it this way. A friend has recently been helping me with music. Writing all the code / making all the 3d models / sfx / marketing etc. I'm about 6 months in making a game 99% myself, full time. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |