As much as I really want to post "I was criticising Star Trek trailers before it was cool" and leave it at that, I have to say that post kinda pissed me off.

It's got to the point where as soon as anyone has a legitimate criticism of anything they get labelled a "hipster". Well, fuck that. I'm 35, and I live in New Zealand. I'm not even sure what the fuck a hipster is other than that it's weird and confusing to me. </abe Simpson>

First things first, SNL actually isn't that funny. It has moments of hilarity (Tina Fey as Sarah Palin for example) but I general it's far closer to Chris Farley than Bill Murray. Maybe it was hilarious in the 70s but I've never seen those episodes. I do know that for the last 20 years, it has been consistently "almost funny".

More importantly, you're not the only one who likes Star Trek, and even if you're the trekkiest trek fan who ever quoted Kahn, that doesn't mean the rest of us aren't entitled to criticise it. Thing is, I'm a fan. I want to see this. And I want it to be good, same way as I REALLY wanted Prometheus to be brilliant. And it just ....wasn't.

So when I complain about this, I'm not some snide douchebag who's just dying for it to fail so I can jump on the Internet and let everyone bask in the glow of how right I am. I'm complaining about it because I'm genuinely worried it won't be good. I'm the one who went to the midnight premiere of Revenge of the Sith, because I still had a faint hope that Lucas would pull something awesome out of the bag.

Back in shop class, when I was about, oh, 12, we were doing some metalworks that involved heating things up with a propane torch. Now some kids noticed a thin metal rod will heat up to a glow quite quickly and looks kinda neat if you wave it around fast. The teacher being at his desk at the time (he was a bit of a dick, to be honest), we spent a good while waving glowing hot metal bits around the propane tank.

The valve on the tank must have been faulty, because suddenly the top of the tank was on flames. You wouldn't believe how fast a room full of 12-year-olds evacuates itself when an explosion seems imminent. Some kids went out the door, others went out the window (we were in a basement with a window right at ground level) and some simply hid behind a sturdy desk far away from the flaming tank.

Our teacher wasn't quite disinterested enough not to notice the ruckus and went in to extinguish the fire. First he tried to stamp the flames out with his shoe, managing mainly to re-arrange the patterning of his soles, and then got a fire-extinguishing glove which did the job.

As I said, this teacher was something of an asshole, seeming to get his kicks from berating and belittling the kids he was teaching, but this time what followed was a very sober and concise lesson on fire safety. Everyone was left with the feeling we'd all gotten very lucky, and there was this worldess concensus that it'd really be best for all concerned if no-one said a word about what had happened, ever.

Hah! I worked briefly for EA on the sequel to Need for Speed. I found out that one of the rules there is, the more money a game makes, the shorter the timetable for making the sequel. It's funny Yahtzee's picked up on that too (if you ever read this Yahtzee, yes it's very much intentional on the game-maker's part, at least with EA).

Basically, they don't care if the sequel sucks, they just want it done quickly so gamers will still have that fond glow from the previous game and plonk down their money without thinking.

Oh, and if you played NFS 2 and thought it sucked, don't blame me, I only modeled headlights and taillights and got paid a crap wage for the job.

If you thought the worst part of the game was the headlights and taillights, well then, go ahead and blame me.

In case you are too lazy to google "The Infinity Candle" and click on the first result:
http://www.glow.co.uk/infinity-candle.html

Glow in the dark lane markings seem so obvious now that someone has thought of it.

Well thats a glowing review. I love the new Xcom. Mods are coming along nicely for it too.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'halloween, glowing, fire' to 'halloween, glowing, fire, neils cauldron' - edited by RhesusMonk

>> ^Sniper007:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
The red ball is likely the heat glow of the object it hit, which doesn't mean an explosion, but incandescence. Lightning itself is glowing because of the incandescent effect of 30,000K temperatures on the gasses of the air + the refraction of air itself. Many of the objects in an around our houses are very rich in carbon, and carbon glows red, orange and yellow depending on the temperature. Add in the very white effect of lightning at close range and wallah, you got yourself a pretty red/white "explosion". That is my guess!

Isn't the "incandescent effect of a 30,000k temperaturre object" one portion of what comprises an "explosion"? Or to phrase it another way, if that wasn't an explosion, then what is? It seems like it was a rapid expansion of air which produced a burst of light and sound... AKA an explosion(?)


Absolutely correct, I used sloppy language, I meant it wasn't combustion (such is the meaning of explosion when we normally talk about it). Thunder is most surely the result of an explosion of air expanded by plasma. Good catch!

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

The red ball is likely the heat glow of the object it hit, which doesn't mean an explosion, but incandescence. Lightning itself is glowing because of the incandescent effect of 30,000K temperatures on the gasses of the air + the refraction of air itself. Many of the objects in an around our houses are very rich in carbon, and carbon glows red, orange and yellow depending on the temperature. Add in the very white effect of lightning at close range and wallah, you got yourself a pretty red/white "explosion". That is my guess!


Isn't the "incandescent effect of a 30,000k temperaturre object" one portion of what comprises an "explosion"? Or to phrase it another way, if that wasn't an explosion, then what is? It seems like it was a rapid expansion of air which produced a burst of light and sound... AKA an explosion(?)

The red ball is likely the heat glow of the object it hit, which doesn't mean an explosion, but incandescence. Lightning itself is glowing because of the incandescent effect of 30,000K temperatures on the gasses of the air + the refraction of air itself. Many of the objects in an around our houses are very rich in carbon, and carbon glows red, orange and yellow depending on the temperature. Add in the very white effect of lightning at close range and wallah, you got yourself a pretty red/white "explosion". That is my guess!

Boy these guys are clearly routing for Obama and exposing themselves as being a set of very one sided journalists, every bit as horrible as those on Fox. Everything on how horrible Obama performed and how he failed to call out Romney on this or that and nothing on the points that Romney called Obama on.

Empty puffy faced idiots we got there on that glowing little box. I get tired of all the stupid spewing they put forth. They're not journalists, they're activist, opinionists with a TV show.

Oh and Chris, according to the ratings not many people are watching the "debate" on your show - not that there is one aside from you shouting out how great Obama is and how horrible Romney is, apparently they'd rather watch Honey Boo-Boo or Real House Wives.

>> ^jmzero:

I liked the original Guild Wars. It had a short, tight, enjoyable narrative that served pretty much as a tutorial - and then you played an interesting multiplayer game that revolved around skill choices and interactions between different characters across team archetypes. The team arena in Guild Wars was somewhere between Magic: The Gathering (you kind of built a deck almost) and Defense of the Ancients, with just a hint of Diablo gear collection and what not. I thought the skill acquisition system was great, and there was a great variety of skills (though the skills often felt underpowered). I only quit playing because it was stagnant, and I was quite looking forward to the sequel (especially when reviews were generally good).
I should have paid more attention to what they changed.
The new one is just a slightly different flavor of WoW, and I assume the glowing reviews are from people who generally like WoW but wanted a different flavor (or no monthly charge). It has nothing to do with the original game. It's the fastest I've ever completely given up on a game I spent $60 on.


GW2 is very very good indeed, and because arenanet is actually paying attention to what people are saying its getting better. Many player suggestions were implemented weeks into release, with more to come.

As for jmzero... I dont think hes even played it. There are many things you can say about GW2, both good and bad, but "slightly different flavor of WoW" isnt one of them. And as for the "its has nothing to do with the original game" comment.... yeah nothing.... except it continues the story from GW1, has characters from GW1, has the same races and many of the professions from GW1, then theres the areas, music, signet based skill system etc... christ it even uses the same engine and instancing backend (tho now with persistent zones).

But... if he doesn't like it, fine.... his opinion.

I liked the original Guild Wars. It had a short, tight, enjoyable narrative that served pretty much as a tutorial - and then you played an interesting multiplayer game that revolved around skill choices and interactions between different characters across team archetypes. The team arena in Guild Wars was somewhere between Magic: The Gathering (you kind of built a deck almost) and Defense of the Ancients, with just a hint of Diablo gear collection and what not. I thought the skill acquisition system was great, and there was a great variety of skills (though the skills often felt underpowered). I only quit playing because it was stagnant, and I was quite looking forward to the sequel (especially when reviews were generally good).

I should have paid more attention to what they changed.

The new one is just a slightly different flavor of WoW, and I assume the glowing reviews are from people who generally like WoW but wanted a different flavor (or no monthly charge). It has nothing to do with the original game. It's the fastest I've ever completely given up on a game I spent $60 on.

I wanna see glow-in-the-dark mammoths.

Curious what people seem to think is a "bang for your buck" logo? Does everything need a bevel, a glow, or a swoosh?