|
NEWS 588 - 141 Comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was actually considering buying an Xbox 360 based soley on this game. Not having a pause button is disturbing though. What if Ninja is in campaign mode and has to take a shit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
I was actually considering buying an Xbox 360 based soley on this game. Not having a pause button is disturbing though. What if Ninja is in campaign mode and has to take a shit?
Park it somewhere and hope your buddies can cover your ass! If Zilla gets this by this weekend, maybe we can find time for a little JA vs. Zombie Apocolypse action!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funny, I hadn't even heard of this game. Hopefully Zilla can give me a demonstration sometime over the Thanksgiving visit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The demo on Live is actually pretty good. It's the first campaign. Don't know how many chapters it is since we didn't play the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone think they'll make a Walking Dead series? HBO perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And speaking Walking Dead. Those are my kind of zombies. Was it someone here that posted the article about the problem with speedy zombies??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re speedy zombies. What's the problem with them other than the obvious one that they are much harder to evade than the slow ones?
Anyways, one has to be prepared for a fast zombie outbreak. If slow ones break out the military, law enforcement, and rednecks would be all over that shit and the problem would be solved rather quickly. However, the fast ones would catch all those motherfuckers off guard and spread rapidly.
I'm telling you right now you need to have a plan and some large caliber rifles and handguns are in order. 9 mils wont do shit. You need to destroy the brain or sever the spinal cord to stop a zombie and with the fast movers, it's hard to get a clean headshot. With a 45 cal or 10 mil you can at least knock them down for a while with a torso shot, giving you those precious extra seconds to escape.
Try not to get pinned down in one area. You may hole up in some building Dawn of the Dead style but eventually you'll get surrounded by thousands of those hungry ass fuckers - and don't be fooled, you're not getting away from a thousand fast movers unless you happen to have a tank on hand.
My plan should this happen, is to make my way as fast as possible to the nearest marina and swipe the most seaworthy sailboat I can find. Now a luxury motoryacht would be pimp I know, but eventually you are going to run out of gas and then you're fucked. After commandeering the sailboat, I'll set about finding a few survivors to bring along. The ideal group would include a couple guys and several girls. You are going to need to repopulate the species once you've made it to your uninhabited island.
That's a rough sketch. In real life, when this happens, I'll have to adjust on the fly depending on where I am. Caught at the airport or in a shopping mall and it's going to be tough. Probably have to head to the nearest bathroom and climb through the ceiling ventilation for a while. It's just tough with the fast movers. I mean you are really going to have to do some shucking and jiving if you want to make it out of there alive. That's one of the main reasons I stay in shape. I think you all should too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My survival plan would be to fall down, get bitten, and become one of the agile bastards nipping at your heels. I would be much more athletic as an undead, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What else could you do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bone - What about a Rookies stop while you're in town? I'm thinking Friday just before close... so I'll pencil you in... I got this box full of THE WALKING DEAD and BRUBAKER'S CAPTAIN AMERICAS for you... so... yep, we're all set!
Don't forget your plastic!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll be there for sure. What time do you close?
Nick Nick, so what's the problem with fast zombies?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, Jack, personally I found the Walking Dead to be off the hook, and - blasphemy, I know - the Brubakers to be merely okay. I am definitely in the market for some more Walking Dead, though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm... I never had chance to think about it, but it is hard to consider zombies (fast or slow) commandering a boat and sailing around. Don't bring up zombie pirates - they can't exist. Too stupid. But, what if they get into water and start biting fish? Does the whole zombie movement start in the ocean then? On day you are chillin on your deserted island, doing some fishing. You get a nibble and pull in a zombie fish which promptly bites you.
OH SNAP!
How is this for scary? You are spear-fishing, Bone-style. You are out a ways from shore, when a mass of zombie fish-creatures comes at you from all directions. You'd have no hope. They'd be on you like a bunch of piranah. Even if they are slow, they'd be faster than you. That might be even more scary, the slow mass of zombie fish closing in.
F-that... that is some scary shit. If you ever have been snorkeling and thought about how vulnerable you are at that moment.... you know what I am talking about!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus Fatty. I'm never going in the ocean again.
My issues with fast Zombies????? Not sure. I liked 28 days, 28 weeks was ok. No rational explanation other than traditionalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigFatty said:
How is this for scary? You are spear-fishing, Bone-style. You are out a ways from shore, when a mass of zombie fish-creatures comes at you from all directions. You'd have no hope. They'd be on you like a bunch of piranah. Even if they are slow, they'd be faster than you. That might be even more scary, the slow mass of zombie fish closing in.
Yeah Fatty, that's pretty scary, except it sounds pretty much like fucking piranha!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bwah ha ha!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dude! Except they are zombies! Whats the difference between zombies and cannibals?
Think about a zombie octopuss, or a squid, or a zombie shark. A zombie shark is much scarier than an ordinary shark! Ninja please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NickNick said:
My issues with fast Zombies????? Not sure. I liked 28 days, 28 weeks was ok. No rational explanation other than traditionalism.
No, not your issues with fast zombies - you said earlier, "Was it someone here that posted the article about the problem with speedy zombies??" so I assumed you were referencing some problem with them. I'm curious what that problem is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember having a conversation about zombie piranhas before. I couldn't figure out how they'd behave any differently. To have the piranhas be zombies seemed redundant. No less scary though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
NickNick said:
My issues with fast Zombies????? Not sure. I liked 28 days, 28 weeks was ok. No rational explanation other than traditionalism.
No, not your issues with fast zombies - you said earlier, "Was it someone here that posted the article about the problem with speedy zombies??" so I assumed you were referencing some problem with them. I'm curious what that problem is.
I believe the directer of the Dawn of the Dead, Day of Dead movies had issues with zombies that moved fast. I think, if I remember correctly, he thought that they weren't TRUE zombies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigFatty said:
Dude! Except they are zombies! Whats the difference between zombies and cannibals?
Cannibals have beating hearts, and aren't dead.
OMG, I agree with Bone on this one. Fast zombies are the only ones we need to worry about. Face it, if they're slow and you were ready for fast, it'd just become a new national past-time. Forget pistols though. A high-powered rifle with a scope for distance work. Other than that, a shotgun (might I recommend this one) and maybe a flame thrower just for kicks.
My personal implementation of fast vs. slow zombies would differentiate those that were dead and revived and those that were converted while alive. The Converted would be the fast ones, the Risen would be the slow ones. They can co-exist. And since they are competing for the same food source, they actually compete. I've thought a lot about this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fatty - Zombies eat anyone they see and are insatiable. Cannibals either eat someone they vanquish in combat or as a result of a survival situation. Either way, after they are full they chill out. Zombie piranhas and sharks behave just like they do when they are alive. They eat you just the same. Now a zombie octopus would be a little scarier but I think I'd be safe on my sailboat. Besides, it would be pretty tough for a zombie human to catch a fish and have the virus spread. I'm pretty sure zombies are afraid of water.
Nick - George Romero just said that because in his day all they had were Haitian zombies and those fuckers, like all Haitains, are slow. Since then, our advances in genetic research and biological warfare have made fast moving zombies a real threat.
Robot - I don't think slow and fast zombies could co-exist. The slow ones couldn't compete with the fast ones for food and would die out in a month or two (whatever their shelf life is). That shotgun would be the ideal personal firearm. I'd buy one today if I could but I'm pretty sure it's not for sale. Shotguns in general are awesome anti-zombie weapons but don't have the round capacity to take on a hoard of zombie - really just onesies and twosies. That's why I'd have a couple hi capacity 45s and rely on a run and gun strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
Robot - I don't think slow and fast zombies could co-exist. The slow ones couldn't compete with the fast ones for food and would die out in a month or two (whatever their shelf life is).
That's like saying slow zombies couldn't co-exist with US. What's the slow zombie's most effective tactic? Overwhelming numbers. The Converted zombies would be bound by the same limitation of movement that we would be due to the sheer numbers of Risen. Only, the Converted aren't rational; Brains == Food. They would try to run right through a group of Risen to get to some brains on the other side. They might take a few down with them, but the Risen would get them eventually.
Also, I don't think the zombies HAVE to eat or else they die. I think they like to, but otherwise, they just slowly degrade. And from what I've seen, they can operate with pretty minimul physical integrity.
I just ordered World War Z from Amazon. We'll see what their take is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well really the main difference between fast and slow zombie (other than speed) is the means of production. Slow zombies comes from supernatural means, while fast ones come from viral infection. Now slow ones can convert humans into slow zombies by transferring the supernatural "stuff" for lack of a better word. Fast zombies spread through blood bourn infection. The likelihood that you have a problem of both types of zombies together is low.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
The likelihood that you have a problem of both types of zombies together is low.
I disagree. If you look at I Am Legend (the book, not the movie), I believe those were slow zombies, though not quite mindless, and the infection was due to a blood bourne pathogen which went dormant in absence of food. There, too, he differentiates between the converted and the revived. He doesn't make the fast/slow observation, but does indicate there are two varieties. I know what you're thinking, those are more vampires than zombies, and it's a fair point. But if you consider that the infection is caused, in both cases, by a virus/parasite, and it infects living and dead hosts, it's a valid example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I meant the supernatural variety (conjured up by Haitian Voodoo) and the blood bourn infection type being the two types. Odds of having those two around are low imo.
In the case of the infected zombies, if you consider fast moving zombies slow down when they haven't eaten in a month and they are about to die then I'll agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
In the case of the infected zombies, if you consider fast moving zombies slow down when they haven't eaten in a month and they are about to die then I'll agree.
Zombies... slowing down, because they're about to die... Really? Zombies? Die? I think you might be missing one of the fundamental reasons zombies are scary :) Can you cite an instance where A) fast zombies become slow zombies? or B) Zombies starve to 'death'? I think you might be into pure speculation at this point.
By the way, I played multiplayer in Left 4 Dead last night. I completely mastered it. Well, the concept anyway. You have to stick together. If you get separated, it's over. So many games tried to enforce teamwork, and it finally took zombies to get people to work as a team. There also a hint of realism to it since, when you play on Live, you're playing with complete strangers. In zombie movies, it's usually a bunch of strangers working together (well, except for the young newly-wed couple, but she gets eaten, and he throws himself to the zombies after that).
The multiplayer is played in rounds where you take turns as the survivors or zombies, trying to get further on the map than the other team. The hordes of 'regular' zombies are computer controlled. But as the zombies, the human players spawn randomly as Boomers (big fat bastards that can vomit on the survivors which attracts a HUGE wave of regular zombies), Hunters (can 'pounce' on a survivor and knock them down, requiring another survivor to knock the hunter off or let the victim die.), Smokers (can grab people from great distances with their tongue and choke them until freed by another survivor), or occasionally as the Tank (HUGE dude that pretty much requires all 4 to shoot constantly for a good 30 seconds at least--does massive damage in that time, especially if you coordinate with the other zombies.) Zombies respawn every 20 seconds until survivors are dead or at their safe room.
I don't know if it's worth the $60 to buy (I'm not saying it is or isn't), but I could see us playing this for quite a while. Oh, and matchmaking is FAST. You can drop right into an existing game and you just take over one of the AI players. When you leave, the AI takes over again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can multiplayer go higher than 4 survivors???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. 4 survivors, 4 zombies. 8-player multi. Like GoW1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
Zombies... slowing down, because they're about to die... Really? Zombies? Die? I think you might be missing one of the fundamental reasons zombies are scary :) Can you cite an instance where A) fast zombies become slow zombies? or B) Zombies starve to 'death'? I think you might be into pure speculation at this point.
I can cite one instance as a matter of fact. In 28 Days Later, there are a bunch of zombies strewn all over the landscape as the jet goes by. They've run out of food and are about to, I'll use the term "expire" vice "die" for those that are semantic sticklers. Yeah, they are moving quite slow. Crawling if you will. It's stupid anyways, and I just brought it up because you had mentioned earlier that if they don't eat they degrade. Well since I don't really think fast and slow zombies are likely to coexist, I thought I'd explore ways in which they could.
Real world zombie discussion aside, I'm looking forward to Left 4 Dead this weekend. Perhaps you'll join me on a zombie killing spree?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
Real world zombie discussion aside, I'm looking forward to Left 4 Dead this weekend. Perhaps you'll join me on a zombie killing spree?
Absolutely. I don't know if Zilla is convinced enough to get it yet or not, but I'm happy to participate in a demo if you all are up to it.
And fair point on the 28 Days reference. I don't remember that part, but it's been a good while since I saw it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Creeko's got XBL Gold free for the weekend, I might make an appearance if you decide you want to slum it with my some cheap Euro trash wanna be with a bunch of old games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't you have Halo 3? I don't see Bone playing Viva Pinata.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I got Halo 3 and Gears v1.0 which are about the only games we can have fun with. Unless your down with Driving games I've got Forza and PGR3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Creeko, I've got Forza 2 (assuming that's the one you have). I don't have any friends that play that. If you ever get another free pass, let me know and we'll turn some laps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not to revive the zombie debate (debate about zombies, not a debate by zombies... well, maybe some of both), but I'm reading Monster Island. Standard z-pocalypse survival story with some interesting twists; bad-assed, 16-year-old girl soldiers, and part of the story is told from the zombie's perspective...
One of the characters in the book is a med-student, and theorizes that zombies are dumb because of the nerve degeneration and oxygen-deprivation between death and reanimation. So he puts himself on a respirator (no discussion on how he self-intubates, I don't know) and dialysis to keep his organs working and blood clean until he reanimates, and stops his heart. When he wakes up, he's not breathing, is incredibly hungry for meat, a little uncoordinated, but otherwise mentally-alert! Intersting twist, medical improbability aside.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To me, when you start trying to make a plausibility argument for something like zombies, you've gone in the wrong direction. Maybe I'd disagree if I read it. But as with comic books, some things you just have to accept a priori and not try to explain with science or else it will all unravel really quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I once saw a cheesy sort of movie similiar to this idea. I think was called "My fiancee is a Zombie"... or some other "Brilliant" title like that.
This girl and her boyfriend were laying on the beach when a zombie walks out of the ocean, yes, just like swamp thing and ends up falling on the boyfriend and biting him.
The boyfriend slowly turns into a zombie and begins craving flesh. It's not the normal way, you die, then you're a zombie. He slowly builds up these cravings. At one point he bites a girl on the arm because he can't hold back his cravings anymore. He ends up eating their travel agent as they're planning their honeymoon.
I never finished the movie andit was really poorly made, but I guess it was an interesting concept for zombies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robot - did they explain the reason why he craved meat? Why aren't there any vegetarian zombies I wonder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But I thought they craved brains, not just any old meat? Or are these subtle fragments in the overall zombie lore?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Jack, do you get alot of requests for Vegetarian Zombie comics?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, Bone's was the first! Hey, are you ready for another shipment? I've been all up in your box and I think I'm done with it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bone, thanks for the set-up...
Anyone from Live can plug your ears, since you've heard this one...
What do vegetarian zombies eat?
GRAAAAAAAAINS!
Ross, I agree to a point. I certainly don't need the scientific explanation. Though most of the zombie books I've read seem to try to do that, to a greater or lesser degree. I Am Legend does that quite a bit. I think it's because the traditional explanation for it is almost always a virus or bacteria, they try to relate it to real science to lend it some credibility... if that's possible. Just like most of the concepts in Star Trek, Star Wars, etc. are at least based on real scientific theories or ideas.
Generally, I think it's mainly the 1960s zombies (" * of the Living Dead" movies) that craved brains. Seems like most of the newer fiction is just wanting flesh of some kind--usually human, though not always. I don't know that there's ever been a justification for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, but aren't the zombies dead? But un-dead? No heartbeat, breathing, etc? It's at that point that the realm of possible scientific explanation goes out the window, and it falls squarely into the realm of supernatural IMO. So my point is that trying to explain that scientifically is just asking for trouble, and the more you try to do it, the worse it sounds.
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for filling my box! I will pay you for your services later today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's why it's called science-fiction. The leap from one to the other is where the hyphen comes in :) Besides, in all these discussions, whenever I say something like "zombies are..." or "zombies can't...", I'm speaking from the perspective of the lore. Like saying "green and blue are the only lightsaber colors possible from from natural crystals. All the others are produced from synthetic crystals which must be cultivated." Obviously, we're not debating the existance of actual lightsabers (because we all know they exist).
Besides, no one on this site has any room to criticize the "what if zombies" discussion. As I recall, there was quite a bit of discussion about wailing on 5-year-olds. While 5-year-olds exist, I don't think you'd find enough of them to take part in the theoretical beat-down :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
Besides, no one on this site has any room to criticize the "what if zombies" discussion. As I recall, there was quite a bit of discussion about wailing on 5-year-olds. While 5-year-olds exist, I don't think you'd find enough of them to take part in the theoretical beat-down :)
Well, currently it might be difficult to find enough to do the job, I think it is feasible to brainwash kids to be attack animals. Hell, I bet in Sparta, this was a common trait in their 'warrior' class kiddies. You may even find this in Sparta Michigan. If you look deep enough in one of the trailer parks, not only will you find Bone getting a massage from Xerxes, but a horde of chitlins establishing physical dominance over the last few Cheetos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FYI, the original "Night of the Living Dead" was shocking because the zombies were gnawing on human bones like they came in a striped bucket with a side of mashed potatoes. No brains are mentioned at all...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swerb said:
FYI, the original "Night of the Living Dead" was shocking because the zombies were gnawing on human bones like they came in a striped bucket with a side of mashed potatoes. No brains are mentioned at all...
Yeah, but then they wised up. It's all about net calories. Eating a bone (giggity) takes a lot of energy for not much return. Sure, the marrow is nutricious, but look how hard it is to get to, and how little there is! Even with a nice butt-steak or thigh muscle, you're going to have to chew a lot just to get it down. And let's face it; those zombies don't have the stamina for that! There's shamblin' to be done! Not to mention the music videos... But brains!, once you get past the stay-fresh skull (vacuum-sealed for freshness), it's like pudding! You don't even need teeth! You could just jam a tent pole into the skull and suck it like a Capri-Sun, right down to the pulp at the bottom! (that's how you know it's fresh-squeezed)
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
That's why it's called science-fiction. The leap from one to the other is where the hyphen comes in :)
I disagree. The fiction part doesn't mean "impossible by the known standards of science." That's where supernaturalism (and in this case the derivative genre "horror") takes over which takes the science out completely. And that's where I'm arguing zombies properly lie. If you try to turn it into science fiction, I argue, you're making a mistake.
That doesn't mean you can't have sci fi elements in a horror story or vice-versa, but IMO you shouldn't apply sci-fi rules to explaining zombies, that's all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aren't sci-fi elements used to explain the zombies in 28 Days Later (and sequel 28 Weeks Later)? Both good zombie movies in my opinion (the first I'd even call great). I don't buy that theory, Bert.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it's not a theory, it's just my opinion. I personally tend to think that when you use science to explain the supernatural, it crumbles quickly under scrutiny. Perhaps you do not share my affection for what science does and does not explain well or are better able to suspend disbelief in those particular areas. To me, it's kind of like the Bert vs Swerb Signs debate - he can get past scientific manglings, and I can't.
There is a definite trend in modern fiction do this, I'm well aware - I'm simply saying I think it's a mistake. Clearly if they keep making money off of this kind of stuff, I'm in the minority. But I prefer to keep my science plausible and my zombies supernatural.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to confuse, Bert. I was using "theory" in a different context -- science doesn't have a monopoly on the word afterall -- I was using it to mean your viewpoint on this topic.
Why can't zombies have a sci-fi origin? I assume you're okay with super-heroes and Jedis using it. Is this just an arbitrary preference? Kind of like Rad in regards to condiments? In that case, pile on the Ketchup, Bert! Sci-fi zombies are goooood!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First of all, I understand it's an opinion. I'm fine with that. I don't agree, but I'm fine with that too. I'm only 'arguing' for the sake of the discussion.
science fiction
–noun
a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc.
Supernatural, as I would define it, would be more typified by gods, demons, ghosts, spirits, 'magic', and anything else that falls into the "because I said so" realm of explanation. Using science as a basis for speculation, extrapolation, or justification doesn't offend me if it's scientifically plausible.
A virus that wipes out most of humanity, however unlikely the effects of the virus, strikes me as the very definition of science-fiction. Like Ross, it's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess zombies can't have a sci-fi origin in my book because they're dead. Like I said before - no heartbeat, no respiration, you're dead and you just cannot be walking around. That runs entirely counter to everything we know about animal life on this planet. So to me, you have to accept that it's just magic that they're walking around (hence the supernatural, non-scientific explanation) and just live with it. And I can do that, which goes to your point about superheroes.
For the most part, superheroes' powers come from magic, by my reckoning, whether the writers intend it to work that way or not. Only in a small number of circumstances could there be a somewhat plausible scientific explanation (like Captain America, for instance). And it does sometimes bug me (especially as I get older) when they try to posit a strict scientific rationale for a hero's power, like Spider-Man. In the Marvel Universe Handbook back in my day, they had some crazy scientific-sounding mumbo-jumbo to explain his powers, which I once read to my Dad, and he laughed his ass off. I was insulted at the time, but he was right - it's silly: Spider-Man's powers come from magic. If you're willing to buy into that violation of physical law (and obviously I am), you can enjoy the rest of the story. The trouble is when you then try to re-apply those physical laws - you're melding science and non-science and now it's just as mess.
Jedis are the same thing - the Force is supernatural, period. When Lucas came along to the prequels and threw in midi-fucking-chlorians, he did exactly what I'm railing against - he tried to use a scientific explanation for an inherently supernatual phenomenon. I know I'm not alone on that one, either, just check the interwebs. Can't we all just agree that some shit cannot be scientific and call it supernatural? It just works better that way!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
Supernatural, as I would define it, would be more typified by gods, demons, ghosts, spirits, 'magic', and anything else that falls into the "because I said so" realm of explanation. Using science as a basis for speculation, extrapolation, or justification doesn't offend me if it's scientifically plausible.
A virus that wipes out most of humanity, however unlikely the effects of the virus, strikes me as the very definition of science-fiction. Like Ross, it's just my opinion.
I think this is the crux of our disagreement: I do not view dead people walking around to be scientifically plausible. To me, that is inherently supernatural. I suspect we're just quibbling over what "dead" means in this case, but by my line of reasoning, a virus can pretty much by definition only act on living organisms.
So if you want to dream up a flavor of zombie that isn't "dead" per-se, that still has a beating heat, respiration, and brain activity, but otherwise behaves like a zombie, then sure, I'm onboard with a possible scientific explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your point about supernatualism is also an intersting one to me, Spider, and not surprisingly, one where I also disagree. While gods, demons, spritis, etc are some of the most common forms of supernaturalism in our culture, I would argue that supernaturalism and science are mutually exclusive. If it's a claim that is not testable or amenable to scientific scrutiny (or already debunked scientifically), it's supernatural. This would include astrology, ESP, talking to the dead, etc. And to my point (that I'm sure I've beaten to death already), dead people walking around has such an incredible weight of evidence against there being a scientific explanation that it must at least provisionally be considered supernatural in my view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am adding Zombie's to my list of "Things not to bring up on JA" right under push-ups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, this is all friendly debate as far as I'm concerned!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sci-fi or supernatural explanation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I don't feel that there is a viable scientific explanation for that one either, so where does that leave us? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross said:
Hey, this is all friendly debate as far as I'm concerned!
Absolutely! Bunky, just because I yell and swear like a Roughneck on Live doesn't mean I'm always like that :) As far as I'm concerned, this is just a conversation... really. Besides, how much fun would it be if we agreed on everything and sat around stroking each other all day? We'd have to rename the site Jackoffery.com (though it is available.... I checked)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
We'd have to rename the site Jackoffery.com (though it is available.... I checked)
HA HA! Dude! What an awesome porn site domain-- You should buy it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suprisingly, I'm going to agree with Bert on most if his points here. Zombies are supernatural and dead. Scientifically, there's no way to animate dead tissue unless something external is providing the current that would stimulate the brain impulses.
As far as that goes. 28 Days and I Am Legend were both good movies..... I just don't think of them as zombie movies. Those were infected people and none of them came out of the ground or became zombies after they died.
Put it this way. If you're being attacked by a buch of zombies, are you really going to care what there origin is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I find it amusing a). when Robot or Ross yell and swear on LIVE (it adds to the overall experience), b). reading well thought out responses on a subject that does not even exist.
I think it is a great well to celebrate JA's birthday! I believe my first comment to Zilla when the Zombie topic can back up was "Bring up Zombie's on JA and all the guys get hernie!"
In addition, I am loving the fiesty side of Robot. I love that both you and Ross provide a wealth of knowledge in your arguements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NickNick said:
Suprisingly, I'm going to agree with Bert on most if his points here. Zombies are supernatural and dead. Scientifically, there's no way to animate dead tissue unless something external is providing the current that would stimulate the brain impulses.
I still say science fiction allows for "imaginary" type science. So those aren't zombies in 28 Days Later? If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, eats brains like a duck...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess my point is, Jack, that if you skew too far down the "imaginary" line, and you start contradicting science (by say, having animated dead people), you end up in the fantasy or supernatural realm. You can definitely push the limits - I'm reading a book right now called The Physics of the Impossible that kind of delves into some of this stuff, like trying to say if ESP would be scientifically possible. But the author is careful to say what is within the realm of what we believe is scientific possible. And I'm sticking to my guns: dead people don't walk, let alone eat. That shit ain't science!
And to your point about 28 Days Later - I agree to an extent: I can allow for calling them zombies even if they don't fit the "classical" definition whereby they have to be undead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thinking a bit more about this, I went to the Wikipedia page on Zombies in popular culture. By my reading, they mainly account for zombies as a mystical or supernatural process as well, with the exception of something like Frankenstein, who is a quasi-zombie (though if you read the original, Frankenstein was pretty far from a monster, IMO, but that's beside the point). With Frankenstein, it's a bit different in my book because it's more like bringing a corpse back to life rather than say that a zombie is still a corpse, still dead, but moving around. Some might say I'm splitting hairs but I don't think so, it's very central to my point, which again, is that dead people don't walk, moan, and eat, and trying to explain that scientifically is a non-starter.
But I also found this bit:
The 1988 Wes Craven film The Serpent and the Rainbow, based on the non-fiction book by Wade Davis, attempted to re-connect the zombie genre with the Haitian vodou ("voodoo") roots that inspired it. The film poses both supernatural and
scientific possibilities for "zombification" and other aspects of vodou, though the scientific explanations for them, which involve use of the poison tetrodotoxin, have been dismissed by the scientific community.
I guess that means I'm more leaning toward the scientific community, which is my basic argument throughout this thread. If it doesn't bug you that scientists poo-poo a scientific explanation of a story element, more power to you. But I personally don't care for it.
Also this bit is similar to what I mentioned earlier:
The depiction of zombies as biologically infected people has become increasingly popular, likely due to the 28 Days Later and Resident Evil series; 2006's Slither featured zombies infected with alien parasites, and 2007's Planet Terror featured a zombie outbreak caused by a biological weapon.
So I'm aware there's a trend to do this, but to me it feels like as we grow ever-more reliant on science, we recognize that science legitimizes things. But there's such a thing as going too far, and diluting public understanding of science by trying to make it look like there is a remotely plausible scientific explanation for supernatural phenomena.
However, the part where they say "biologically infected people" makes me wonder if they are also saying that they're still alive. In which case, I withdraw any objections, as I stated earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am siding with Bertles n Germs on this one. It is distracting to me when an explaination is offered that doesn't jibe with logic, reason, current knowledge, etc. You don't always have to explain why things are - especially if it is not important to the story being told.
Another good example of a show doing things correctly is True Blood. The story is about vampires in the mainstream. It doesn't go about explaining the whats and hows.... you accept vampires being real as a part of the show. You don't care why, because that is not important. If they try to explain the how and whys in the second season, the show will suck. I don't care how they get vampires to exist. They just do, period.
Same thing for super heroes. Whats this? He got bit by a radioactive spider and now has strength and abilities that mimic a spider's? Great! Lets move on. I don't need to know anything more.
PS - Rad is certainly a supernatural sex-bomb.
PPS - The only explaination of finding piss-soaked shoes in a hotel closet is a supernatural one. No need to explain it further.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Science fiction or supernatural?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes... we've gone there, Bunky.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's as if you were reading my mind when I first scrolled down to the photo above... I am still looking for the transition from Zombie's to Down Syndrome Superheroes..... Maybe you can carry this at the store:
http://www.disabilityheroes.com/
Fatty, I love your explanation for the shoe mishap. Remind me to not let you near my closet on the cruise!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like the explanation for the vampires in I am Legend also the zombies in 28 Days Later. Both were caused by a virus. I don't think there was anything supernatural about it and it was all within the stretch of reasonability. Just you wait and see you unarmed motherfuckers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigFatty said:
...You don't care why, because that is not important. If they try to explain the how and whys in the second season, the show will suck. I don't care how they get vampires to exist. They just do, period.
Same thing for super heroes. Whats this? He got bit by a radioactive spider and now has strength and abilities that mimic a spider's? Great! Lets move on. I don't need to know anything more...
Not important? You'd really rather have NO explanation than one that provides some background? And your second paragraph contradicts your first. Getting bitten by a radioactive spider IS an explanation (one that is fictionally-scientific, I might add). How is simply "getting bitten by a radioactive spider" acceptable, but "getting infected with a virus" isn't?
It's something real, which causes something that is fictional. It's a Mad Lib:
[character_name] got [verb_past_tense] by a [noun] and now [pronoun] [attribute_or_activity]
Bill got infected by a virus and now he is a zombie
Peter got bitten by a radioactive spider and now he wears pajamas and climbs on things
Besides, drawing this kind of arbitrary line in the sand is a little short-sighted. 200 years ago, someone who wrote about machines that can fly would be burned at the stake. The science, at that time, couldn't explain it. That doesn't mean science couldn't plausibly explain it. Just that their science at that time couldn't explain it.
Bone, I agree. I Am Legend had a nice explanation. I won't do it justice by trying to summarize it, but I liked it. That doesn't mean I believe the theory stands against significant scientific scrutiny. But I didn't dismiss the idea simply because it was scientific in nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you guys are deliberately missing the point I keep stressing: the part where I get hung up is that zombies are dead. I can work with a science-ish explanation of a virus that makes people act like zombies, but my understanding is that by definition zombies are dead. I don't care what you guys say, but science has nothing to say about dead people running around! Not Scientifically Plausible! And no, Robot, if the I Am Legend explanation claims that the creatures are dead, it's not scientific in nature, it's pure fantasy.
As for Spider-Man, you're right to a point, but it too comes down to plausibility. Once a power begins to run afoul of basic scientific principles (such as spider-sense), it's silly to try to use modern-day scientific understanding to explain something that modern day science says, quite literally, is not possible.
I could be dissuaded from this position if you posit that it's in the far, far future, when scientific understanding has advanced to the point that the currently impossible is now somewhat more plausible. But quite frankly, taking my example of the spider-sense, which is essentially precognition, according to the book I just read about the physics of the impossible, precognition is one of the very, very few things that he almost entirely rules out (along with perpetual motion, but unlike, say, time travel or parallel universes) so all I'm saying is at this point in our understanding, it's magic, it's not science.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whats up with your color choices Robo? You damn near gave me a seizure reading your post.
Robo got inspired by a color formatting tool and now he gives young children seizures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bert - I think the "I am legend" vampires as well as "28 Days later" zombies weren't technically dead. I believe, and I may be wrong, that they had a beating heart and minimal brain functionality. One of the rats that Big Willie Style had given a test cure to had all but return to normal and I think he had some form of EKG hooked up to a live vampire.
I agree with you on the supernatural ones that are really dead. That can only be explained by Haitian Voodoo. By the way, those are the slow ones. The fast ones are the ones infected by a virus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, sold! Next controversy! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
Bert - I think the "I am legend" vampires as well as "28 Days later" zombies weren't technically dead. I believe, and I may be wrong, that they had a beating heart and minimal brain functionality. One of the rats that Big Willie Style had given a test cure to had all but return to normal and I think he had some form of EKG hooked up to a live vampire.
I agree with you on the supernatural ones that are really dead. That can only be explained by Haitian Voodoo. By the way, those are the slow ones. The fast ones are the ones infected by a virus.
There were two types of creatures in I Am Legend. They differentiated (in the book, not the movie) between the ones that were infected while living, and the ones that "lived in the dirt"--the ones that reanimated and literally rose from the grave. It's splitting hairs, but generally, the ones infected while alive were more like traditional vampires (conscious, thinking) while the risen ones were more like zombies (unthinking, didn't feel pain, etc.) The big key for both groups in IAL was that they were killed with stake through the heart--more like vampires. No brain trauma needed. Again, they do explain that scientifically in the book.
The ones you refer to as "really dead" aren't explained by Haitian Voodoo, if at all. First, the Haitian "zombies" aren't, in fact, dead. They are poisoned and thus appear dead but are basically in a state of hibernation. And as Bert mentioned above, the existance of such is more legend and superstition than documented fact.
So, you're right, except instead of "really dead" it should be "not dead" and by "Voodoo" it should be "chemistry".
Ok, who wants to introduce the next topic of pointless arguing and speculation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BigFatty said:
Whats up with your color choices Robo? You damn near gave me a seizure reading your post.
Robo got inspired by a color formatting tool and now he gives young children seizures.
Yeah, sorry about that. In the lighter background of the edit window it didn't look as bad. Once it's posted on the darker background, much harder to read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
The ones you refer to as "really dead" aren't explained by Haitian Voodoo, if at all. First, the Haitian "zombies" aren't, in fact, dead. They are poisoned and thus appear dead but are basically in a state of hibernation. And as Bert mentioned above, the existance of such is more legend and superstition than documented fact.
Is this to imply that any of the zombies or vampires mentioned above are otherwise? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross said:
Is this to imply that any of the zombies or vampires mentioned above are otherwise? :)
HA HA HA! Of course not... don't be silly... The other zombies don't really exist.... Not at all... Move along, please...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The I am Legend book sounds fruity. You can't have dead being get infected and rise. Truth be told, there is only one type of zombie - the 28 Days later kind. And they are fast. The only slow zombies are you and with your clogged arteries. Everything else is fiction my man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bone said:
The I am Legend book sounds fruity. You can't have dead being get infected and rise. Truth be told, there is only one type of zombie - the 28 Days later kind. And they are fast. The only slow zombies are you and with your clogged arteries. Everything else is fiction my man.
...
When did I argue they were anything BUT fiction? I thought this was an academic discussion, not me defending the position that zombies are real.
Besides, if you're going to argue that the 28 Days are the most 'real', you might want to consider that something that moves that fast, with that much strength, all the time, would have the metabolism of a hummingbird, and would starve to death in days, if not hours.
For the record, again, and more explicitly for the slow kids in the back waiting for the short bus, there are no zombies. They are all fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RobotSpider said:
When did I argue they were anything BUT fiction? I thought this was an academic discussion, not me defending the position that zombies are real.
Besides, if you're going to argue that the 28 Days are the most 'real', you might want to consider that something that moves that fast, with that much strength, all the time, would have the metabolism of a hummingbird, and would starve to death in days, if not hours.
WTF are you talking about? Zombies are real and if you don't start taking the threat seriously and preparing the battlespace, you are going to be zombie food my friend.
Your second point is absurdacris. Those fuckers aren't running nonstop like my perpetual motion Rolex. They chill and mill about smartly between meals. Besides, I run just as fast and I'm just as strong as those fuckers and you don't see me starving to death in hours. There's plenty of shit to eat immediately post apocalypse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to zombies:
I am now fully caught up on the Walking Dead (as of issue 60), and I just picked up Left 4 Dead at Meijer and started playing last night on my new memory foam video game chair (no boom), which is currently the only furniture in my basement.
I also just got ahold of the audiobook of "World War Z", which I've heard is very good - sounds like an after-the-fact interview-based account of the Zombie Apocalypse, ala Studs Terkel. That will be listened to on my commute for a while.
But speaking of my commute, this is also where I've rediscovered comics! I get them on my laptop and can get through several issues each ride. I'm all caught up on Invicible now too, and I'm starting in on the Brubaker Captain Americas - looks like I have 49 issues to get through.
What else should I be reading?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know you were probably asking about other COMICS you should be reading, but since I can only contribute to the zombie discussion...
Yeah, World War Z is a good one. You're right on the whole interview thing. Another one I'd recommend is Day-by-Day Armageddon. It's written as a series of journal entries. Like so many of the zombie books, it started out as a web log (before they were officially called 'Blogs'). Also, for some reason, lots of them are written in first-person. Don't know why, but they are.
Let me know if you want to play L4D some time. I still haven't gotten my fill of it, and I'd love to play some more multiplayer. They recently had a free update, which included a new multiplayer game-type: Survival. There's no "get to the lighthouse" bullshit. You start out at one location, set up gas cans and explosives and 'alert' the zombies when you're ready. Then you just see how long you can survive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, for what it's worth, the Zombie Survival Guide is surprisingly good. It has a lot of the logistical discussions (why hand-weapons are better than firearms, motorcycles better than cars, etc.). It's a light read, but fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack, have you acquired Left 4 Dead yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bunky said:
Jack, have you acquired Left 4 Dead yet?
Just bought a used copy on Ebay. Maybe I'll have it for the weekend! ($25.49 shipped after a 15% off ebay coupon code for videogames was used)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice, I'm going to have to get more games thru Ebay. Anyway, if you guys want to try firing up a game sometime this weekend, I'll try to set aside some time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NickNick said:
Anyone think they'll make a Walking Dead series? HBO perhaps?
Somehow I overlooked this comment earlier on. That would actually make a really nice weekly show. There's plenty of time for character development, plenty of opportunity for action... I like it NickNick! Get started on the screenplay!
Who do you all see as playing the lead? What about the kid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What!? NickNick gets credit for that one? I've been saying HBO should be making a Walking Dead series for years!
Actually, I find most properties would work better as an HBO series (Vs. regular TV or a movie).
By the way TRUE BLOOD SEASON 2 debuts June 14 and ENTOURAGE starts back up on July 12! (I was worried about Entourage returning after the 5th season finale... it had the markings of a season ender!)
Swerb - I know you don't watch Lost. Remember when we made fun of you for not watching BSG? And then you tried it? How'd that work out? Exactly. Now that it's on hiatus, it's the perfect time for you and Stacy to catch up. Do it. Burn through 'em! You'll love it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just came across his post first. We'll give you Executive Producer rights. (you don't have to do anything and you still get a bigger check)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with Zills, Swerb. Lost is off the chain. It dips during season 2 and recovers by mid season 3, but talking to people who've picked it up on DVD haven't noticed it as much since they're burning through the episodes so fast.
What cracks me up about Lost is that so many people love it, but don't realize how similar to comic books it is (Bryan K Vaughn is a key writer, for crissakes) - when I say that, they roll their eyes - as if they have any idea what comics are really like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross - Robot, Jay B, and I played some online Left for Dead last night. I completely suck, but had fun fighting Zombies!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jackzilla said:
Bunky said:
Jack, have you acquired Left 4 Dead yet?
Just bought a used copy on Ebay. Maybe I'll have it for the weekend! ($25.49 shipped after a 15% off ebay coupon code for videogames was used)
Um. Yeah... that Ebay sure is sweet... I'm uh... still waiting for my game (the seller said it's been shipped). But hey! Did you see the sweet deal on it I got!? :P
By the way, for those concerned: It looks like I'll be playing GEARS tonight (surprise!) with special guest WonderBoy and possibly JohnnyBells. So... oh yeeeeah - get yer butts in the air! Maybe Bert will come out and play?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can probably swing an early East Coast friendly appearance... The Dodger - Cubs game is on now, so I shouldn't be distracted!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm in! What time?
BTW Bunky, tomorrow is the day I head to Wrigley to watch the Manny-less Dodgers beat the Cubs anyway!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross said:
I'm in! What time?
BTW Bunky, tomorrow is the day I head to Wrigley to watch the Manny-less Dodgers beat the Cubs anyway!
Well, Wonder just called me and he's sick and out. And we might play pickle ball this evening with my in-laws first (then I'd be on tonight). Look for me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no, Jack's going to put the P in Ickle Robot...
Manny's a DB, I prefer Pierre. He can hit, RUN, and CATCH a ball! I think Stultz is pitching for the Dodgers. The Cubs won today, even though there were a couple of bad calls...
If we go to the bullpen early, that's good for the Cubs. I said to my Dad today that I couldn't believe Billingsley had pitched 6 innings and only gave up 4 hits and Hill hit a HR the next pitch... Our starting pitchers can't go deep enough in the game and our bullpen is weak...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is Bunky rambling about...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly... This ain't Sportcenter!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I tell you, I suck at Gears so bad now that I can hardly scrape up any fun at it. I guess if I played more often I'd be a little better and hopefully have some fun, but now I remember why I'm not so eager to play all the time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bert - I was telling Spider that I felt bad any time I happened to kill someone and it was you, because I knew I was inching you that much closer to quitting...
I definitely have my times of frustration -- Spider too! -- but I can run all night with just one or two sweet manuevers under my belt. What can I say? I love this game (even if I feel like most people on Live are cheating or have inside knowledge on shit).
Anyways, thanks for playing with us, Bert!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I forgot at times my BALLS are bigger than some on this page....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just read the most recent issue of Walking Dead (#61) - and man, I cannot get over how great that comic is. Might be the best ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't wait for the 10th trade (collecting up to #60)... should be out soon. I keep thinking I'll switch to the monthly issues after the next trade, and maybe I actually will this time.
Bert - Did you get the 12-issue All-Star Superman series by Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely? Great series and now the same team is doing BATMAN AND ROBIN (#1 is out this week). Check it out! I haven't read it yet, but it looks sweet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm on it! Thanks for the rec!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm also reading the Geoff Johns JSAs, since Bells creams himself over them. So far, I am enjoying them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bunky said:
Jack, have you acquired Left 4 Dead yet?
Actually, I stopped out at Meijer today to have them price match Target's $37 advertised price! Guess what? They were out! D'oh!
Have no fear: Angie is stopping by Target on her way home to pick me up a copy. I think it's my father's day present.
So... anyone for some LEFT 4 DEAD tonight!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
XBL is down for maintenance! I think Patrick and I may go to a late movie tonight...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MERTHERFERKER!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I might be up for some!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's two nights in a row with just Spider and I playing LEFT 4 DEAD... Fun stuff. Nice to mix it in with the usual Gears rotation for something different.
Bells is all into his UFC game. And soon Fight Night 4 comes out (featuring 45 boxers including Ali AND Tyson Chicken). How Bone can resist playing this combination with Bells on Live is beyond me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEFT 4 DEAD actually sounds like a really fun experience. unfortunately, my time is being taken up by Mario Cart Wii, Alpha Centauri and Spore. That's when I'm not working on my new up and coming webcomic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from imagecomics website:
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
FRANK DARABONT RESURRECTS THE WALKING DEAD AT AMC!
AMC and Frank Darabont bring Robert Kirkman's epic tale of human survival to the small screen!
As announced in Variety and Hollywood Reporter, AMC has signed on to
bring THE WALKING DEAD to television screens. Image Comics' epic tale
of human survival in the face of a zombie apocalypse by writer Robert
Kirkman and illustrator Charlie Adlard is being adapted as an ongoing
television series by Shawshank Redemption and Stephen King’s The Mist
director Frank Darabont.
“I’m a huge fan of Frank Darabont’s body of work and AMC has
impressed me to no end with Breaking Bad and Mad Men,” Kirkman said. “I
couldn’t be happier with THE WALKING DEAD ending up here.”
THE WALKING DEAD deal will bring Darabont in not only as Executive
Producer, but also as writer and director on the adaptation. Terminator
producer Gale Anne Hurd of Valhalla Motion Pictures and David Alpert
from Circle of Confusion will also produce. While further information
is under wraps, the plan is to keep the show extremely faithful to the
Kirkman and Adlard’s comic book series.
More details on AMC’s adaptation of THE WALKING DEAD will be announced shortly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wha-wha-WHAAAT? That is impossibly sweet! Something will surely fuck this up and keep it from happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, i'm playing Nazi Zombies in Call of Duty: World at War, and perhaps this is blasphemy, but I like it better than Left 4 Dead!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross said:
Wha-wha-WHAAAT? That is impossibly sweet! Something will surely fuck this up and keep it from happening.
According to Robert Kirkman on Twitter, he has utter confidence in the quality of this project and it sounds as if he will be hands on as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That doesn't mean squat (to me). He's a comic book writer, not an industry insider, whose opinion I would trust more.
Besides, my point was not literal - I'm just saying that it's too good to be true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The director's not a duche bag is he, Bert? :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nor is he a douchebag! I'm very excited! Which also probably means it will suck. I always have to assume the worst in hopes of being pleasantly surprised.
Speaking of, I just read issue 64, and all I can say is that if this show is half as good as the comic, it might be the best show ever. The end of this latest one is very Frank Miller-esque (before he went crazy).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Played the Left 4 Dead 2 demo last night. Very nice. They've added some new "captains" (not a boss, but stronger/more unique than the average horde zombie). While that departs from zombie-canon (Ooooh, zombie cannon), it's a necessary game-mechanic. They've also opened it up a bit. The levels feel more air-y. The graphics feel a bit more crisp, and all the movement is more fluid and smooth.
I could only play the campaign, but there were 3 or 4 other game-modes that will be available in the full version. The new melee weapons are awesome. I tried the police baton, the frying-pan (SUCH a satisfying TONGGGG when you smack a zombie with it), the banjo (or guitar, don't remember), and the machete. These aren't oh-shit-I'm-out-of-bullets-so-now-i-have-to-use-melee weapons, either. They're capable of doing massive damage, at obviously reduced range.
Another new feature is being able to pick up vials of boomer-bile. You know that fat bastard that barfs on you to call down the horde? Now you can return the favor and unleash the horde on... well, on the horde, if you want.
The demo is two full campaign sections. Plenty of time to get a feel for the game. Multiplayer demo is also included, but didn't try that yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is anyone else getting CoD Modern Warfare 2 tomorrow like me? Hmm??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ross said:
Is anyone else getting CoD Modern Warfare 2 tomorrow like me? Hmm??
Not me! I mean I got it last Friday... all part of my attempts to be Swerb-Sweet(tm)!
Just been playing the campaign so far: Pretty sweet and HARD as hell in parts even on regular difficulty! Having played Gears and Halo so much, I'm really hoping that the multiplayer of MW2 will seduce me for a while. We'll see... I'll be trying it this week I'm sure. Maybe I'll see you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hells yeah biznatch! Finally maybe I can get you chumps to play a real online game for a little while! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Edge and I played MW2 multiplayer last night. Meh. It's just run around, get killed, spawn, repeat. It's very well done but just not my brand (and I was really hoping to dig it). I miss the melee and up-close fighting of Halo and Gears. Where's the dance in this game!? If you're into sniping and real-life guns I suppose you'd like it. So, I'll finish the campaign -- which admittedly kicks Halo 3 ODST's ass -- and then decide whether to shelve it or ebay it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would argue that Halo and Gears are also "run around, get killed, spawn, repeat" as well: that pretty much sums up every online FPS. I do agree that there is less melee in CoD (though I do end up using the knife fairly often) but I guess that's a matter of preference: in Halo, I loved the rifle butt takedown, but in Gears it's sloppy and annoying.
I definitely do like the aspects of the different guns in the game, and the leveling up, and tweaking which gear and powerups you take in. In some maps, I'll take one kind of rifle, and in others I'll take something else, based on how I like to play it. There's lots of little touches like that in CoD that no other online FPS has (to my knowledge) that lends it a depth the others lack. That's why I like it best.
But of course I'll reserve judgement on this one until later tonight! Also I just realized today that I get Veteran's Day off so tomorrow I expect to be playing pretty much all day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya know, I was thinking about the "get killed, spawn, repeat" comment when I wrote it but a big part of it is that basically my experience is that who ever sees who first in COD is going to win the fight. Whereas I've had one-on-one Gears battles that last a bit where it's anyone's fight. Even Halo has that more. At least that's my observation. And the classes and various weapons: Unfortunately I could give two shits about. Don't think it doesn't bother me too: It's a beautiful game and hugely popular. But I'm afraid it's back to Halo and Gears for me.
Oh yeah, I was also disappointed that "2 player co-op" just meant there was a Special Ops mode (like Gear's Hoard) and did NOT mean you could play the campaign together (which would have been sweet).
On a side note: While playing last night with Edge, we were called noobs by another player. Not an unusual thing but I found it humorous considering the game was a couple hours from official release. "Really? The game's not even officially out yet, but I'm a noob already!?" Fuckers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's hilarious. It's annoying that I'm going to play it the day it comes out and there will already be people who are experts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think we need to reclaim the word n00b. For too long, people have used the 'N' word as a derisive, hateful term to describe us. I think we should start calling each-other by the 'N' word. "What up, my n00b?" "N00bi3 pleaz..." If we use it, it strips the power of that word for use by others. Of course, we'll still be offended when OTHER people use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny, I was using the word noob in MUDs in the early 90s (I think we typed "newb") when most of them probably weren't even born!
Anyway, I played MW2 for a few hours last night - multiplayer only, no single player yet (that's for this afternoon). Overall, it's definitely very similar to the original MW, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. The tweaks they added like "death streaks" are great, too.
I started out the evening getting my ass handed to me, of course. I didn't know the maps, and I had to reacquiant myself with the controls. I definitely had my fair share of death streaks, with not even one 3-kill streak for at least an hour. But things slowly started turning around for me and by the end of the night, I was consistently in the top 1/3 or so of scorers per round.
I just love the unlockable gear and challenges in this game - it keeps me playing "just one more match" for way too long when I know that I'm on the cusp of advancing or unlocking some widget for my current weapon of choice. I find it very satisfying to experiment with the different perks and whatnot to find your groove. If you don't find this stuff fun or interesting, like Jack said, your amount of fun in this game will probably be much diminished.
I also can definitely see Jack's cricitism in a new light after having it so fresh in my mind: you do die a lot more in this than in Gears or probably Halo. The action is just much faster paced, and it's easier to die - there's no armor that does very much. If you get shot a few times, you're dead. But I actually like that aspect - the converse is it's easier to kill people.
There's also a level in the new game called "Hangar" or "Terminal" that is really reminiscent of the old Counterstrike that I used to play in the late 90's/early 2000's, which still ranks as my favorite online shooter ever. Brought back many memories of screaming rants. Good times!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spider - n00bi3 please! I love it!
Bert - the pace is faster in MW2 - after playing it, Halo seemed sluggish. But, even after all this time, more fun! ;) I'd really like to get back into Gears, but all us average players gotta reclaim that game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was meditating on our different tastes/styles when it comes to online shooters last night, Zilla...
I think your comment about the fact that in MW2, whoever sees the other guy first tends to win the fight is dead-on. But what I realize is, that's one of the big reasons I like it! Something you love about Gears is something I hate - It drives me absolutely nuts when I work to get the drop on someone, line up my shot, pull the trigger (or hold it down), and they turn around, blast me with a shotgun and kill me.
Now, you can argue that that person just exhibited superior Gears-playing skill, and I would agree. But it's not that particular kind of skill that I find quite as fun or interesting as mastering the element of surprise, waiting for your shot, and taking it. That skill is more my style. And having said that, I'm not talking about sniping, either - I generally disdain snipers as much as the rest of us.
For what it's worth, MW's style strikes me as more realistic, too: in my limited exposure with combat games (paintball), if you do get the drop on someone, you generally will win. Not all the time, but most of the time. And that's pretty much how MW is, and it sits in a happier place on my "fair meter" than Gears' version, I guess. Just interesting to me.
In any case, I almost have the M4A1 fully unlocked! I just need 15 more FMJ kills and I will unlock "extra mags". At that point, I might move on to another primary weapon. They give you incentive to work on lots of different bling in this game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's definitely a different taste thing, Bert. I love hearing someone approach me from the side in Gears, being able to roll away, and possibly getting the better of him with a buzzsaw, gunshot or melee attack. Most the time, I may go down like a turd. But the high I get from coming out on top with such a skirmish -- even if it's rare -- is enough fun fuel to keep me going for awhile. I love the heart-pounding, up close stuff. My balls-to-the-wall approach is often my undoing, but it's my preference in a game.
When I was playing with Joe Bem on the campaign we talked about that. And how in real life I would behave so very differently. I would be much more careful, laid back, let the other guy go first kinda soldier. That's more the way to play COD, like you said, bide your time, wait for the perfect shot.
I'm really hankering to play some BURNOUT REVENGE with someone... it's been so long and that's such a fun racer! Anyone game? It's available as a On Demand Download for 20 bucks I think. Let's do it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sweet interview with ROBERT KIRKMAN regarding The Walking Dead AMC TV series.
Along with some casting news:
Andrew Lincoln is Rick:
Jeffrey De Munn is Dale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unbelievably sweet! I just hope all this attention to the zombies doesn't displace the fact that they are about the least interesting aspect of the series.
|
|
|
