Your unpopular (non-political, non-offensive) opinions!

[Quackers101]

25 minutes ago, IPD said:

Ever watched this?

might have, some of the issues that I noticed with the recent 007 movie. But some of the action helped with the use of "4D" aka special effects.
 

Spoiler

 

So maybe some of the cuts help in a more VR/AR or using the senses. but man, sometimes it was just too much nonsense that makes you kinda want to go back to older action movies. And there wasn't much time in the 007 movie to EXPLAIN or give more DEPTH or context to things, but I guess they did keep up the action for 3 hours or so, didn't feel slow or boring. Although didn't get much out of the movie itself story-wise. Wonder if they want to experiment with newer concepts of movies.

 

Also there was some scenes that made this type of cuts, work better and in hindsight. Like was talked about, getting to be the person to know about an escape route or trying to get clues on the move. But it also has to be very balanced and not overdone. And its not just about faster cuts, its also to include the needed context and details in the shot, as well to have every cut make sense. It can be faster and work, but too much change in the scene or not giving the needed details from previous scenes, with action and the force behind the action. Can't just Zoom 1000% in on every attack and out again, it doesn't work?

 

To that this is not the only gripe I have, like take the newer vs the older transformer movies. Were there is just a bunch of things going on and not making needed details to stand out. A bit like older vs newer video games, that the extra details are going to obscure important information. Like were the player is, what they player is doing or holding and not fading into the background or messed into fancy animations were you only see the animation but not the details it's supposed to tell about. or something, if my rant made any sense.

 

 

[Canuck21]

Licorice candies taste good.

[IPD]

5 hours ago, Canuck21 said:

Licorice candies taste good.

If you're talking about the US stuff, I guess I can see that.  If you're talking about the stuff you get in Scandinavia, like the Fisherman's Friend licorice....then you like sucking on cat piss.

[Gork]

Metroid Dread is awful, sterile and bland. EMMI are out place, the maps aren't well marked, or color coded, one hospital gray cooridoor looks like another, you have shoot just about everything to get anyplace and it's a buggy mess.  I don't get why the fanbooys get mad when you point out it's just bad. The backgrounds are lifeless. And I don't know what they were going for with the bosses and angry mutant chicken nuggets. Their's "plot" or something. When did metroid have much for plot? mad jellyfish in space got uppity, do something!

Now:angry Ditto the Pokemon  want to practically hump you, do something. oh and don't mind the T3 drones you can't turn off, even though we created them. And lets take a planet and give it minimal color and textures! yeah! that makes it "hard"

Speaking of! the one reward for speed running it? 

Exactly.  NES metroid: brunett Samus  looking hot and sexy AF was the reward.  Super Metroid, and Fusion? same. Except for some reason they give her a blond hair job.

Dread?

Dreadfully nothing but dick points for people into speed running.

 

[kasugatei]

Puns are just overhyped (bad) attempts at making jokes. 

[Bombastinator]

52 minutes ago, Niksa said:

Puns are just overhyped (bad) attempts at making jokes. 

They’re not supposed to be knee slappers. They theoretically express complicated thoughts about language.   Iirc one of the most lauded English language puns of all time was by I believe (possibly incorrectly) Virginia Woolf. It was “you can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think”.  It only even makes sense if you know several diverse things including a very outdated aphorism. Chinese is very pun rich because the language has two additional directions it can go in because the Language is both pitched and written in character.  For example, there is a word that depending on how it is pitched can mean horse, mother-in-law, the color white, or marijuana.  I’m not sure there is another language that can even touch Chinese for puns.  Different languages have different features.  Supposedly there is no better language for invective than Italian.  I’ not sure what the strength of English is, if there is one.  It’s got an unusually large number of words in it though, which are often more exact than is assumed.  I’ve always been amused by people who will come out with a phrase like “because ahm a’merkin”. It hasn’t been a commonly used word in a long time but a merkin was a hair piece.  If you find an old enough dictionary it will tell you exactly what kind though.  It’s…not to be worn on the head..  does remind one that adult humans grow hair in all sorts of different places. .   I kind of want to reply to a lot of those “yes.  I think you’re a merkin too”

Edited December 1, 2021 by Bombastinator

[kasugatei]

6 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

They’re not supposed to be knee slappers. They theoretically express complicated thoughts about language.   Iirc one of the most lauded puns of all time was by I believe (possibly incorrectly) Virginia Woolf. It was “you can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think”.  It only even makes sense if you know several diverse things including a very outdated aphorism. Chinese is very pun rich because the language has two additional directions it can go in because the Language is both pitched and written in character.  For example, there is a word that depending on how it is pitched can mean horse, mother-in-law, the color white, or marijuana.  I’m not sure there is another language that can even touch Chinese for puns.  Different languages have different features.  Supposedly there is no better language for invective than Italian.  It sure what the strength of English is, if there is one.  It’s got an unusually large number of words in it though, which are often more exact than is assumed.  I’ve always been amused by people who will come out with a phrase like “because ahm a’merkin”. It hasn’t been a commonly used word in a long time but a merkin was a hair piece.  If you find an old enough dictionary it will tell you exactly what kind though.  It’s…not to be worn on the head..  does remind one that adult humans grow hair in all sorts of different places. .   I kind of want to reply to a lot of those “yes.  I think you’re a merkin too”

I am fluent in 3 vastly different languages. I still have to hear or read any remotely funny pun in any of those languages. 

[Bombastinator]

14 minutes ago, Niksa said:

I am fluent in 3 vastly different languages. I still have to hear or read any remotely funny pun in any of those languages. 

Exactly.  It’s not the purpose.  One can’t exactly say a car is a useless thing because it makes a ridiculously inefficient coffee grinder.  I once heard a description of a really good pun as being like a foul odor that slowly spreads throughout a room.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Bombastinator

[Stahlmann]

On 9/9/2021 at 4:45 PM, Tan3l6 said:

I don't like HDR.

 

In general. 

 

For instance starting from 6th second the city view: 

 

I mean it's colorful and all, but it's like a strange drem and not real.

 

HDR doesn't mean realistic. It's just another resource for the content creator to express their intend.

 

A lot of people don't understand HDR and just think it's supposed to be brighter. That is not the case. The only thing it does is add more headroom for bright highlight details. And depending if the creator implemented it, also enable the use of wider color gamuts.

 

I'm of the opinion that everyone not liking HDR either never used a real HDR display or just doesn't understand it.

[RejZoR]

Unpopular? That Halo and Doom Eternal are terrible games. Halo has always been the laziest game design I've seen in ages, from copy & pasted levels all over the place in Combat Evolved to pathetic graphics in the remaster. They literally used checkerboard pixelated dithered shadows (2 bit without any alpha blending I shit you not!) in a game released in what was it, 2020? 2019? I haven't seen that crap even during mid 90's where most games already had smooth alpha blended shadows. I bought the remaster to give it one more try with refreshed graphics and refunded it because of pixelated shadows. It's so pathetic I don't care if it has the best story in the world (which it doesn't).

 

And Doom Eternal is just trying too hard with everything, ending up feeling like it has no idea what it wants to be. It's not sure if it wants you to gun down massive hordes of demons, be Tomb Raider adventure with all the climbing and jumping or a survivar horror by limiting your ammo to absurd levels. And every time I voice this, people sperg out like I'm the biggets heretic in the world. Well, I'm sorry if I have actual game design standards and you don't.

[IPD]

Yep.  HALO is what started the death of the FPS genre.  But MS incinerated planet-sized piles of money in order to push it's schlock (XBOX with ATX-tower-sized-controllers; games like HALO), in order to fool the troglodytes into thinking that Mountain Dew tie-ins = quality.

 

And now Unreal Tournament is a distant memory, and we have COD and BF version 9746 with guns that are both unrealistic and blasphemous at the same time.

[IPD]

6 hours ago, Niksa said:

Puns are just overhyped (bad) attempts at making jokes. 

Puns are the soul of dad-jokes.  Like this one (one of my favorites)

 

"This is my step-ladder.  I never knew my real ladder"

[Stahlmann]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Unpopular? That Halo and Doom Eternal are terrible games. Halo has always been the laziest game design I've seen in ages, from copy & pasted levels all over the place in Combat Evolved to pathetic graphics in the remaster. They literally used checkerboard pixelated dithered shadows (2 bit without any alpha blending I shit you not!) in a game released in what was it, 2020? 2019? I haven't seen that crap even during mid 90's where most games already had smooth alpha blended shadows. I bought the remaster to give it one more try with refreshed graphics and refunded it because of pixelated shadows. It's so pathetic I don't care if it has the best story in the world (which it doesn't).

 

And Doom Eternal is just trying too hard with everything, ending up feeling like it has no idea what it wants to be. It's not sure if it wants you to gun down massive hordes of demons, be Tomb Raider adventure with all the climbing and jumping or a survivar horror by limiting your ammo to absurd levels. And every time I voice this, people sperg out like I'm the biggets heretic in the world. Well, I'm sorry if I have actual game design standards and you don't.

I think many people are biased because these games were part of their childhood. I also still enjoy quite a few games where other people say they're just bad by today's standards. Sometimes these games have more emotional value than what could ever be achieved with new and improved graphics.

 

But i agree with your stance about Doom Eternal. I don't get it. Doom (2016) was very fun, but only for one playthrough. After that i never touched it again. Eternal has so many different mechanics that it is (imo) too far away from the simple and brainless rip & tear doom experience i loved. But i guess they wanted to add some replay value in that it takes multiple playthroughs to really get the mechanics.

[tikker]

3 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

A lot of people don't understand HDR and just think it's supposed to be brighter. That is not the case. The only thing it does is add more headroom for bright highlight details. And depending if the creator implemented it, also enable the use of wider color gamuts.

 

I'm of the opinion that everyone not liking HDR either never used a real HDR display or just doesn't understand it.

So you're trying to tell me High Dynamic Range is about increasing dynamic range?

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

And Doom Eternal is just trying too hard with everything, ending up feeling like it has no idea what it wants to be. It's not sure if it wants you to gun down massive hordes of demons, be Tomb Raider adventure with all the climbing and jumping or a survivar horror by limiting your ammo to absurd levels. And every time I voice this, people sperg out like I'm the biggets heretic in the world. Well, I'm sorry if I have actual game design standards and you don't.

I share the platforming sentiment. The climbing and some of the more platformer-esque jumps break the flow and feel out of place in a Doom game. As for ammo, chainsaw and glory kills are your friend there (and some of the perks help). Once I got the rythm down after the first level or two my ammo reserves practically never ran dry. The DLCs were a different story though...

2 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

But i agree with your stance about Doom Eternal. I don't get it. Doom (2016) was very fun, but only for one playthrough. After that i never touched it again. Eternal has so many different mechanics that it is (imo) too far away from the simple and brainless rip & tear doom experience i loved. But i guess they wanted to add some replay value in that it takes multiple playthroughs to really get the mechanics.

I think so. The main game I loved. It was exactly the high-pace no-break rip & tear experience I would hope to find in Doom. Doom 2016 feels like a slow waltz in comparison. The DLCs were increasingly bullshit though. I really liked them, but lord especially in DLC 2 it really felt like unfair bullshit being thrown at you. And I was merely playing Ultra Violence. Still a great game to me nonetheless, as it does make you feel badass once you channel your inner doom slayer and do punch through.

[RejZoR]

3 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

I think many people are biased because these games were part of their childhood. I also still enjoy quite a few games where other people say they're just bad by today's standards. Sometimes these games have more emotional value than what could ever be achieved with new and improved graphics.

 

But i agree with your stance about Doom Eternal. I don't get it. Doom (2016) was very fun, but only for one playthrough. After that i never touched it again. Eternal has so many different mechanics that it is (imo) too far away from the simple and brainless rip & tear doom experience i loved. But i guess they wanted to add some replay value in that it takes multiple playthroughs to really get the mechanics.

I don't think that's the case. Doom 2016 went backwards in "Doomness", but it brought Mars base exploration and some RPG elements like upgrading of suit and weapons and it was really cool experience. I did 100% completion by exploring everything and it was nice experience. Eternal, despite billion things it wants to do, it's the same damn thing through entire game. In the end I was sick of all the monkey swinging and double jumping nonsense and wathcing 700 trillionth prerendered kill animation to restore health and stupid ammo. And I absolutely hated how every encounter was setup as arena which made it feel like Quake 3 Arena with maps connected in story. Sort of. It just didn't work and I tried to finish it 100% too because it's unlikely I'll ever touch it again, though I missed few pickups at some point because of dumb map design. Doom 2016, I might replay in the future.

[Stahlmann]

5 minutes ago, tikker said:

So you're trying to tell me High Dynamic Range is about increasing dynamic range?

Even though the name pretty much explains exactly what it's supposed to do, most people don't understand it. Even many reviewers only "measure" the HDR abilities of a monitor by looking at the peak brightness and maybe the color gamut. Even though most local dimming implementations are so bad that higher peak brightness basically also means higher black levels, and because of that also loss of shadow detail. Sadly because of this people buying HDR400/600 displays nowadays are being "conditioned" to think that it just means the picture is brighter than SDR.

 

HDR =/= brighter image

 

Just tried to clear that misunderstanding. It's getting increasingly frustrating trying to explain the point of HDR when more and more people buy seemingly "HDR certified" monitors and then being disappointed by the experience.

 

Sadly i don't have a say in the VESA DisplayHDR standard, otherwise i'd make at least 384-zone FALD a minimum requirement for even the lowest HDR400 certification.

[Bombastinator]

5 hours ago, r821e228 said:

Pineapple Pizza is awesome!

I find something salty helps pineapple.   I think this is why “Hawaiian” pizza is good.  Ham is salty.  Pineapple and anchovies works well too, if the anchovies are spread sufficiently thin and evenly.  This I think is the major problem with anchovies on pizza.  They need to be broken up.  I find a whole anchovy is simply too concentrated. Ham an anchovies are both “something umami with a bunch of salt” should be a way to imitate that one. Pineapple with fish sauce maybe?

[Avocado Diaboli]

29 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Sadly i don't have a say in the VESA DisplayHDR standard, otherwise i'd make at least 384-zone FALD a minimum requirement for even the lowest HDR400 certification.

This is actually why I purposely bought an edge-lit TV two years ago and didn't go for any of the ones that had local dimming. Most of the TVs in my preferred price range only offered a few zones and even ones with higher zone count still exhibit the frankly hideous halo effects. So even though my TV claims HDR capability, I never turn it on and don't care about it. Not because I don't see the value of it, but I take an edge lit TV with excellent gray uniformity that at least has consistent light shining through the black regions of the LCD without using HDR over one with a low quality HDR implementation and few dimming zones that on paper tick off more boxes but end up looking worse. HDR makes sense with a ton of dimming zones or an OLED, but that comes at a greater cost which, as of right now, I'm not willing to pay for.

[Stahlmann]

3 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

This is actually why I purposely bought an edge-lit TV two years ago and didn't go for any of the ones that had local dimming. Most of the TVs in my preferred price range only offered a few zones and even ones with higher zone count still exhibit the frankly hideous halo effects. So even though my TV claims HDR capability, I never turn it on and don't care about it. Not because I don't see the value of it, but I take an edge lit TV with excellent gray uniformity that at least has consistent light shining through the black regions of the LCD without using HDR over one with a low quality HDR implementation and few dimming zones that on paper tick off more boxes but end up looking worse. HDR makes sense with a ton of dimming zones or an OLED, but that comes at a greater cost which, as of right now, I'm not willing to pay for.

At least for TV's we're now at a stage where even mid-range offerings can have decent local dimming and thus decent HDR performance without charging thousands of $ for it. I sure hope the monitor market will finally move to that aswell over the next few years. But I've been hoping that for years at this point and nothing changed in that regard.

[Quackers101]

9 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

At least for TV's we're now at a stage where even mid-range offerings can have decent local dimming and thus decent HDR performance without charging thousands of $ for it. I sure hope the monitor market will finally move to that aswell over the next few years. But I've been hoping that for years at this point and nothing changed in that regard.

wouldn't want to use 99% of local dimming, so worthless most of the time for me. Although mini-LED to micro-LED would be nice, then again mini-LEDs are not perfect, it's at least a better experience with having anything with local dimming and using it.

[Stahlmann]

10 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

wouldn't want to use 99% of local dimming, so worthless most of the time for me. Although mini-LED to micro-LED would be nice, then again mini-LEDs are not perfect, it's at least a better experience with having anything with local dimming and using it.

As i have a monitor with 512 dimming zones, it's bascially a no brainer to leave it on. It's able to boost the effective contrast of my monitor at least to double of it's native contrast in the most demanding scenes. Depending on the scene the contrast can get high enough that my calibration device isn't able to measure it anymore. Sure on a 10 zone FALD backlight it can be more problematic than advantageous. But if you have enough zones and the algorythm controlling them is good enough, then it's a great feature and necessary to make LCDs even capable of decent HDR playback. But don't get me wrong: It's still nowhere near the granular control my OLED TV has.

[Tan3l6]

5 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

HDR doesn't mean realistic. It's just another resource for the content creator to express their intend.

I guess it all started with Oblivion - horrible implementation of HDR and "bloom", at least for me.

[Stahlmann]

4 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

I guess it all started with Oblivion - horrible implementation of HDR and "bloom", at least for me.

Since when is Oblivion an HDR game to begin with?

[Tan3l6]

4 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Since when is Oblivion an HDR game to begin with?

Erm, isn't it ?

As far as I can remember, it is.

[Stahlmann]

7 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

Erm, isn't it ?

As far as I can remember, it is.

The game was released long before HDR was a thing. What you're talking about is likely the same "HDR" as in the Arma series, where it tries dim or brighten up the image when you're looking in dark corners or into the sun, kind of how your eyes adjust to different brightness levels. That has nothing to do with how HDR is defined nowadays.

 

That would explain why HDR is bad, becaus it's not the same as the HDR we're talking about nowadays. In fact the two settings have nothing to do with each other despite having the same name somehow.