Oops, forgot to add this thread to my watchlist.
I don't know what a lot of these comics are about (having not played the games they're based on) and yet still find them amusing.
So this comic confuses me. I thought the tentacle was meant to be the Author, but the tentacle is slamming the game while the author's comment is that he likes the game. If it isn't the author, who is it meant to represent?
edited 15th Apr '12 4:21:40 AM by Saiga
A Darker Me maybe?
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."IIRC, both the tentacle and BLU Engie-tan represent flip sides of the author's personality/opinions. The official Author Avatar is the tentacle, of course.
Also, it's possible that this strip represents his initial opinion when he first heard of it, before he eventually changed his mind.
edited 15th Apr '12 4:43:54 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Though occasionally they represent something else. The tentacle is representing the people that dismiss the aforementioned game for those reasons. Engie-tan is representing the author's like of the game? (Not much of a clue there.)
You got some dirt on you. Here's some more!Well that's just plain confusing.
Not really, it's just changing real life to suit the fiction. Penny Arcade does it all the time. It was Real Life Tycho who suggested giving out free pancakes but it was Gabe in the comic they made about it because Gabe's the impulsive one with the stupid decisions. Similarly, the tentacle has a mostly negative personality and so giving him the negative veiw makes sense. It's not an autobio comic (and non-fiction does this sort of thing all the time too anyway).
edited 15th Apr '12 8:33:04 PM by Gvzbgul
I can't wait for the port of it
Well ain't it just a perfect image for Trilogy Creep?
edited 17th Apr '12 10:27:59 PM by Adannor
Yeah, I think it would be perfect. Made me laugh, too.
edited 17th Apr '12 10:29:20 PM by Saiga
What is the last panel referencing?
Riot's the developer of Rift, I think? Anybody knows what they did for that?
So Valve doesn't nerf, it buffs others? Love the hats, too.
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."I consider that "reverse-nerfing", since the end result is the same as standard nerfing.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.^Except for people who do not have the overpowered stuff yet.
The Blizzard way is totally true.
Also, this is so true. I know the whole "video games don't train killers" argument is old, but I think it was well done here.
Wow, this could make a good illustration for Short-Range Shotgun.
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."For once, I partially disagree with the strip's assessment. Rift if going quite strong and good.
How much of WOW's market portion did it take? Because that's the main point of The Rant here.
edited 5th May '12 5:46:08 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.How much did it take from current World Of Warcraft base is impossible to determine. It's got 2 million players, last thing I heard, with World Of Warcraft at 11 and change.
Yeah, I heard that Rift actually tried to be different.
"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific MackerelRift is very different at least compared to other MMOs. But they're all a bit too similar.
edited 5th May '12 6:59:00 PM by Saiga
I'd play it. It would be the second LOZ game I did