drqshadow

Didn't the PSone outsell the PS2 for the first year or so of the product's lifetime? I could be completely on crack here, but I thought I remembered something along those lines.

IGN's collection-managing application has taken a turn for the worse. It's a royal pain to copy and paste, so I'll just link you. PS2: http://club.ign.com/b/list/custom?&lid=100...owner=drqshadow (34 games) Gamecube http://club.ign.com/b/list/custom?&owner=d...p1=20113&objt=1 (12 games) Xbox http://club.ign.com/b/list/custom?&owner=d...p1=20154&objt=1 (40 games) I don't really do the portable gaming thing.

Yeah, you can't go wrong with the Killing Joke interpretation.

A game's price is usually dictated by popularity, really, not quality. But it stands to reason that a game that sucks ass will also not be all that in-demand, and so the game stores are more likely to have a bunch of them laying around. Hence, they offer lower prices on that game's trade-in, since they can't move them. It's not a direct correlation, but the relationship is there.

The fourth will probably be a semi-cameo, maybe a quick fight scene during the introduction... Gwen Stacey isn't really all that good looking... I hate when they interpret comic book blonde to mean "bleach it all."

That's not entirely accurate, though. While they'll buy just about anything, if it sucks and they know they aren't going to move it, they'll buy it for a dollar or less. You won't see a game for cheaper than five bucks in that store, so using your example, they buy fifteen copies of a game for a dollar each, and sell six for five bucks a pop. Their expenses are $15 and their profits are $30, plus they've got seven extra copies of the game in inventory, which they can either sell through the online shop or keep in stock for the next time someone wants a copy.

And if you buy a PC software application, you legally buy a right to one installation of the software, not the rights to resell it. Just playing devil's advocate here... the nix on resales isn't something that's totally foreign, especially when it's something without a true physical manifestation, such as a song, a software license or online access to a "members only" section of a web site, such as the one IGN uses. It's going to be a slippery slope if Sony wants to go in this direction.

I definitely think there should be some sort of reform in the second hand gaming market, but under no means do I think it should be completely stamped out. If the rumor is true, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were, just add it to the growing pile of excuses to put on the PlayStation's tombstone after this generation.

So how are they supposed to have completely redone Bumblebee's body, transforming a '70s muscle car to a '00s street racer, without stumbling upon the fact that this car is actually sentient? Better still, how does the new body not completely fuck up his transformation? Is he going to be "nude" wires and pipes, using the new body as a shield / wardrobe? Lame...

I'd have never given this film a chance, just because I despise Larry Clark's work. So it's actually worth seeing?

Samus. Ryu merely follows his family / nationality's deep-rooted desire for honor and respect, Samus breaks all the rules, risks life and limb on a whole different level, and succeeds wildly in a field that's largely dominated by men.

I'm really not excited about this, especially after that trailer, but I never really cared for the character in the first place, so I know I'm not the audience they're really shooting for. Man, Nic Cage looks wimpy on that motorcycle, though.

Which one? I've got them both... The Wii is head and shoulders above the PS3 on my next-gen priority list, but the 360 is the be-all end-all in my eyes.

Why doesn't anyone in charge realize how much Liefeld sucks?

Man, a few big names involved with this one. I'm not an Aquaman fan, though, so I can't say I'm all that interested in the end results.

Damn you DW, I thought I was going to be all original in saying Zombies Ate My Neighbors...

It's basically the same. They didn't go as deep into it as they did in the book, naturally... didn't mention his skills with gardening or his strange requests that led to his concocting napalm in his cel, but the major parts are still there. They reveal that he is (was?) a white man, though, which didn't please me.

BUMP with my initial reaction upon seeing the film. Sorry to cut and paste from the Oratory, but I don't think I could type it all up again. ---===SPOILERS===--- I went and saw it last night. There were parts that I absolutely adored, and others that I really didn't care for. I LOVED most of the middle of the film, which was pretty much lifted word for word from the book (they left the classic "I killed you ten minutes ago, while you were asleep" line in, which sent shivers down my spine) and I thought the Evey torture scenes / ensuing reveal were outstanding. The aftermath of the torture could've been even more potent if they hadn't cut the whole Stockholm syndrome thing Evey went trough with V in the book. In the first chapters, she didn't know if she loved him like a brother, a lover or a father, but she certainly adored him and it made the moment when she realized he was responsible for her months of torture even more heartbreaking. The government is cast in a much more sympathetic light in the film, too, which I'm not entirely sure I like or dislike. On one hand, it hurts the overall message that you shouldn't trust everything you're told, but on the other... well, this looks a LOT like civilization today. I don't think most people will make the connection that this stuff is supposedly happening in the here and now, but it did make for interesting food for thought anyway. It just makes the idea of a successful revolution a little tougher to swallow... if things aren't really that awful, why would you support a movement to overthrow the government? In that same vein, rather than eliminating every single minority after the war, as they did in the book, they only persecute homosexuals in the film and life for the casual civilians really doesn't seem all that bad. They're repressed, but they don't seem especially upset about it. In the book, things are absolutely abysmal for the common man. Everything is rationed unfairly, people are scared to go out of their homes for the most part, and everyone is downtrodden and utterly defeated. Evey herself doesn't grow in the same way she did in the book, where she basically came into the picture at rock bottom (she wasn't leaving the house at the beginning to meet a coworker for a date, she was leaving to sell herself on the streets for the very first time, since her government-mandated day job wasn't making her enough to pay the bills) and had a lot more motivation to grow to violently hate the establishment as she does by the end of the story. I noticed they cut out basically every other female character, even Mrs. Almond, who basically plays the role of the population of England, suffering, suffering, suffering and finally snapping and lashing out, and winds up having a HUGE role at the end of the book. It's sounding like I hated this movie, which I really didn't, but it was a little frustrating to see them get it so close and then miss by just a little bit. The action scene at the end, where V absorbs six clips of ammo and still manages to take out an entire assault team, pretty much summed it up for me. In the book he was felled by a single bullet, and that meant so much more. The film version made for a much cooler, dramatic visual, but the book version applied more to real life. Anyone could've been under the mask of V in the book, where in the film he was supernatural. And WTF was with every single person in London donning a mask and cowl at the end? Way, way too much.. Still, worth a look if you don't mind long monologues and thinking about more than just what's being shown on the screen.

Those shots of Venom in the animated GIF you posted look a LOT like the film interpretation of Spawn. Not a good thing to see... why is it so hard to translate the liquid-like appearance of the symbiote(s) in the books to the screen? Also not a fan of the spider webs still being there on the dark Spidey costume. I'm pessimistic about all this...

It absolutely causes the price / grade to go down. Way down, to the point that it's not really worth doing unless you want a good-looking copy of the book for your own collection. If the book's restored before you get it graded, there will be an indication on the grade saying as much (they'll know) and it'll basically make your book completely unattractive to any potential buyers. I'd recommend against it, if you're thinking about it merely for purpose of selling them off. They're worth more in the condition they're in now, however bad it may be, than they will be after restorations.

I seriously can't wait for this movie. Now I need to go change my pants.

cough:sarcasm:cough Yeah, I gotcha. I was agreeing with you.

It's a trailer, created by the same production team that crafts the very same promotional vignettes you see on RAW every week. They could craft a twenty minute scene of flies festering on a pile of dog crap into something totally amazing.

I actually like this idea...