The Some Like It HOT TAKES thread

I was more hyped up by Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles than Avengers: Endgame.

SpacePProtean wrote:

I was more hyped up by Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles than Avengers: Endgame.

Comic book movies have turned the summer blockbuster into absolute crap.

It's actually stunning how thoroughly the movie industry has taken source material that I was interested in, and completely destroyed that interest.

All throughout the '90s, we imagined how amazing turning these comics into movies would be. Who knew it would actually come to pass, but the movies would devolve into such toothless, generic, tedious, assembly-line affairs?

The world needs another Marvel movie about as much as it needs another Assassin's Creed game. Give it a f**king rest already.

*Legion* wrote:

the movies would devolve into such toothless, generic, tedious, assembly-line affairs?

So they're exactly like the comics they're based on?

ClockworkHouse wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

the movies would devolve into such toothless, generic, tedious, assembly-line affairs?

So they're exactly like the comics they're based on?

What's it called when you don't agree with something, but it's so satisfying a hot take that you choose instead to change your mind?

*Legion* wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

the movies would devolve into such toothless, generic, tedious, assembly-line affairs?

So they're exactly like the comics they're based on?

What's it called when you don't agree with something, but it's so satisfying a hot take that you choose instead to change your mind?

Victory.

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
*Legion* wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

the movies would devolve into such toothless, generic, tedious, assembly-line affairs?

So they're exactly like the comics they're based on?

What's it called when you don't agree with something, but it's so satisfying a hot take that you choose instead to change your mind?

Victory.

Well, actually it's called a cloqtake.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

RawkGWJ wrote:
Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

From the 80's and 90's absolutely. Nowadays, they try to be more interesting than that.

Grenn wrote:
RawkGWJ wrote:
Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

From the 80's and 90's absolutely. Nowadays, they try to be more interesting than that.

Pro Wrestling is basically a soap opera with way more violence.

mudbunny wrote:
Grenn wrote:
RawkGWJ wrote:
Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

From the 80's and 90's absolutely. Nowadays, they try to be more interesting than that.

Pro Wrestling is basically a soap opera with way more violence.

And man boobs. Don’t forget the man boobs.

mudbunny wrote:
Grenn wrote:
RawkGWJ wrote:
Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

From the 80's and 90's absolutely. Nowadays, they try to be more interesting than that.

Pro Wrestling is basically a soap opera with way more violence.

see also: Game of Thrones

WWE no longer uses the word wrestling. It's Sports Entertainment full of WWE Superstars. They have scripts and the talent basically do as their told, even down to what spots need to be hit during matches. Lately it seems like they can't have any long term storytelling because they literally change their mind after every single episode. Last Friday they were changing the scripts an hour before the show was meant to go live.

It's not like that elsewhere really, not to that same degree. New Japan Pro, AEW, and many other places basically try to treat it as 'these two people have to fight and they might get pissed about something and continued fueding and fighting over the next little bit'. But generally try to give reasons for matches through tournaments and title shots.

It's almost like there's some kind of internal struggle for control of WWE in the background. Like some old man with old fashioned ideas keeps interfering when a younger generation tries to drag the company into the modern era.

b12n11w00t wrote:

WWE no longer uses the word wrestling. It's Sports Entertainment full of WWE Superstars. They have scripts and the talent basically do as their told, even down to what spots need to be hit during matches. Lately it seems like they can't have any long term storytelling because they literally change their mind after every single episode. Last Friday they were changing the scripts an hour before the show was meant to go live.

They've been changing angles and stuff in the hours before a show would go live since the Attitude Era at least, that is nothing new.

It's not like that elsewhere really, not to that same degree. New Japan Pro, AEW, and many other places basically try to treat it as 'these two people have to fight and they might get pissed about something and continued fueding and fighting over the next little bit'. But generally try to give reasons for matches through tournaments and title shots.

While the other places definitely have better long term storytelling, the WWE is getting better at it. (Looks at Roman Reigns current storyline). Also, there is a hope that some day, VKM will resign and then HHH will take over as head. When that happens, expect to see a dramatic shift in how things work. (Thinks back fondly to the early years of NXT when HHH was in charge).

The other feds are also working under a different environment and have different fans and expectations from those fans. Wrestling (in Japan) is way more respected and less thought of as "Soaps with fights" and "umm, you know it's fake, right??" AEW is trying to break free of the "must copy WWE" stank that so many feds have tried (and failed) to do, and I think they are doing a good job at it so far. It doesn't hurt that Tony Khan is pretty much hands-off (by way of booking) and allows The Young Bucks, Cody Rhodes and (I think) Kenny Omega to handle the booking. That they also have "Le Champion" is just a cherry on the top.

(Side note, any doubt that Jericho has, with his time in AEW, moved himself into serious consideration as GOAT??)

mudbunny wrote:
Grenn wrote:
RawkGWJ wrote:
Grenn wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Top Gun is a tone poem about toxic masculinity.

Also how trying too hard to be masculine ends up looking really homoerotic.

You mean like pro wrestling?

From the 80's and 90's absolutely. Nowadays, they try to be more interesting than that.

Pro Wrestling is basically a soap opera with way more violence.

That take is so cold it hit absolute zero.

My hot take:
Outer Wilds is awesome and makes me wanna play Fallot 4 which makes me wanna play Fallout NV which makes me wanna play Fallout 3 add-on that is set in the swamps of South Carolina...or some place like that.

StrongSad wrote:

My hot take:
Outer Wilds is awesome and makes me wanna play Fallot 4 which makes me wanna play Fallout NV which makes me wanna play Fallout 3 add-on that is set in the swamps of South Carolina...or some place like that.

Yes.

Make a hole with a gun perpendicular
To the name of this town in a desktop globe
Exit wound in a foreign nation
Showing the home of the one, this was written for

This seems like the thread in which to share this again. I still agree with every word.

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eb0WcxyUcAEqCRU?format=png)

(This is on my mind again, maybe because I finished the main story in AC Odyssey.)

I don't see a problem with this

Agathos wrote:

This seems like the thread in which to share this again. I still agree with every word.

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eb0WcxyUcAEqCRU?format=png)

(This is on my mind again, maybe because I finished the main story in AC Odyssey.)

I'm sure there's a much longer list, but AFAIK these devs don't crunch:

Klei
IO Entertainment
Bethesda (supposedly now)
Criterion
Drinkbox
Failbetter
Media Molecule
Amplitude

CDPR and Rockstar... Just kidding!

Agathos wrote:

This seems like the thread in which to share this again. I still agree with every word.

IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eb0WcxyUcAEqCRU?format=png)

(This is on my mind again, maybe because I finished the main story in AC Odyssey.)

This is good, but unless the whole thing is prefaced with "I'm willing to pay more for..." then this kind of limits us to where we are today. If everyone who bought a Slay the Spire or Risk of Rain 2 or Moonlighter were willing to pay $50 for that experience then we'd have a lot more of those. Unfotunately a quick read of steam reviews (if you are a masochist) shows basically every thumbs down on highly critically rated games is "too short" or "not worth it".

Generally, I consider a game to be a winning purchase if A) it costs $1/hour or less, or B) it's got something that's such a powerful experience that it was worth the cost. Games in the A list are pretty common, but I don't run into category Bs too often. (Some games that last a long time screw things up enough that they don't feel worth the money.... Fallout 4 was one. I paid way less than $1/hour, but I was so disgruntled about those lousy hours that I stopped buying Bethesda games.)

When a game is $40 or $50 and I only get eight or ten hours out of it, they had better be off-the-charts amazing.

The entirety of the videogame economy stands at odds with this.

You know why I'm not willing to pay $50 for your Slay The Spires? Because I know full well that if I sit on my hands for a few months, I can pay $30 for it instead, or $15 a few months after that.

I mean, I went back and checked. I paid $16 for Slay The Spire, which launched at $25. And that purchase was BEFORE it launched (i.e. Early Access).

The videogame economy is bananas. You can get a game cheaper before AND after it launches. That $50 price tag only exists ephemerally, for a brief period of time. Sure, there's outliers to that model, like Factorio, but they're rarer than hen's teeth. With that in mind, is it any wonder that a lot of us are averse to a "full-price" purchase? Because we've been conditioned to know that that's the "chump-price" and the "savvy-price" is just around the corner.

The $1/hr is the most idiotic and arbitrary mark of quality.

A movie: $7/hr
A meal at a restaurant: $75/hr
A book: $2-5/hr
A music album: $3-8/hr

So why do we just magically decide that a video game is only “worth it” if it reaches some random mark?

Who are you getting your prices for those from? Lucille Bluth?

staygold wrote:

The $1/hr is the most idiotic and arbitrary mark of quality.

A movie: $7/hr
A meal at a restaurant: $75/hr
A book: $2-5/hr
A music album: $3-8/hr

So why do we just magically decide that a video game is only “worth it” if it reaches some random mark?

If you’re a subscription based consumer, the price per hour is massively lower than what you’ve listed there. Games subscription services are similar. Netflix, Audible, Kindle Prime, Apple Music, Spotify, and Game Pass are ridiculously lower in price per hour than a premium purchase would be.

RawkGWJ wrote:

If you’re a subscription based consumer, the price per hour is massively lower than what you’ve listed there. Games subscription services are similar. Netflix, Audible, Kindle Prime, Apple Music, Spotify, and Game Pass are ridiculously lower in price per hour than a premium purchase would be.

Or it's massively higher, if you're not using it.

I paid $10 last month for my Game Pass sub, and didn't play a single game on that service, because I was busy with games on other platforms. So that was infinity dollars/hour.

staygold wrote:

A meal at a restaurant: $75/hr

That's a lot of wine and surf and turf!