Slasher on 1/11/2012 at 23:11

---

There were some good Star Wars games for the PC during the 90s too. LucasArts had some good things going for them back then.

fett on 2/11/2012 at 14:56

---

@dethy - Dude, it was a religion for me back in 1980. When Han went into carbon freeze, I came home from the theater, grabbed my Han Solo action figure and stuck that motherfucker in the freezer. He did not come out until 1983 and was barred from use in any Star Wars play by my brothers or friends. I own nearly 200 books, and my toy collection will likely pay for at least 2 years of my oldest son's college when I sell it. Yes, I'm ridiculously fucked up over Star Wars.

edit: p.s. I have also had sex. Multiple times, in case anyone is wondering. Not with my mom. I promise.

SubJeff on 2/11/2012 at 15:40

---

That video... ha ha ha. I remember him doing a load of stuff.

Of course, it would be nowhere near as good if he didn't have such gold plated nerds to deal with.

Renzatic on 3/11/2012 at 05:10

---

It was still a religion back then, too. You just didn't have the internet around to expose all the weirdness that surrounded it back then.

nicked on 3/11/2012 at 11:54

---

Cars is enjoyable enough, but it's not good by Pixar standards. Leaving aside the formulaic plot and mostly unlikeable characters, for me, the main problem is that the setting just doesn't make any sense. A car is a machine made by humans for humans, and everything about it's design suggests this. If you take humans out of the equation, it becomes this borderline-creepy world that doesn't seem to have any reason for existing. In the world of Cars, how did cars come about? Did they evolve, like Transformers or something? That doesn't make much sense, because they wouldn't have evolved into cars. They are impractically designed to be sentient creatures; they would have arms and legs. Did the cars get made by humans who then all died out? If so, how did the cars become sentient? How does their economy work? How do they reproduce? Do they get constructed in factories like real cars? If so, with no external function (i.e. no purpose for humans to use them for), why do they resemble cars, and not some efficient Terminator-like designs? How does the society decide when to make new cars? How does death work in a completely car-centic society? Do dead cars get brutally cannibalised for their spare parts? There are no sensible answers to these and hundreds of other underlying sociological and physiological questions about the world of Cars. Is that over-thinking it? Of course. But on a sub-conscious level, it undermines the entire setting for the story. How can I care about Lightning McQueen when I'm not even sure how and why he exists? That's why I think it works for kids, who have no concept of most of these questions, and can just accept it, but it doesn't transcend to being a good story that adults can enjoy in the same way as most of Pixar's fare.

Compare it to Wall-E. Wall-E makes total sense. He is a well-constructed character, and part of that is that you can immediately understand how and why he exists in his world. He was constructed by human beings to clean up rubbish on an ecologically-destroyed Earth of the future, but he's been alone so long that he's developed some personality quirks. His design, his actions, and the design of the world around him, completely fits that. Within a few minutes of watching Wall-E, you've stopped asking those sub-conscious questions because they've been answered through clear design on-screen, and you can simply focus on Wall-E as a character.

Well this was an odd place for a rant about Cars...