june gloom on 15/5/2009 at 17:39
That's stupid. It's not like 3D Realms has any
money.
steo on 15/5/2009 at 17:44
It's fucking hilarious that Take Two gave them $12million, which went towards paying the development team a presumably generous salary to sit around eating doughnuts, watching porn and redesigning the same maps over and over again.
It's no wonder they're pissed, but how the hell do you sue a bankrupt company?
Myagi on 15/5/2009 at 18:18
to quote Scott Miller from 2003
Quote:
The write-off has to do with the fee that Take2 paid to Infogrames to buy the rights to DNF. 3DR got no part of this money -- a total of $12 million.
The reason Take2 did this is that it's a smart revenue management move: Take a markdown now while Vice City is super successful and overall revenues are sky high, then when DNF comes out it's 100% pure profit (because they took the write-down well before the game came out).
in other words they didn't get any of that money, which is in tune with a comment from Miller today
Quote:
>>> Did Take Two give 3DR that $12 million for development <<<
No. We didn't get a penny of that money. This, along with so much else, is 100% spin, being eaten up by those who have no clue whatsoever. But, we cannot talk yet. We will, soon...
steo on 15/5/2009 at 21:04
Ah, ok fair enough.
D'Juhn Keep on 16/5/2009 at 00:02
Whoa, totally wasn't expecting the annual "ZylonBane vs Starship Troopers" itt
Enchantermon on 16/5/2009 at 00:27
That's incredibly sad. Suing a bankrupt company is just adding insult to injury. I mean, Take-Two may be within their rights, I don't know, but still...
Queue on 16/5/2009 at 03:10
Quote Posted by Enchantermon
That's incredibly sad. Suing a bankrupt company is just adding insult to injury. I mean, Take-Two may be within their rights, I don't know, but still...
The report I just read stated that they are suing for the source code: (
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2009/05/15/duke-nukem-forever-may-still-get-released/) http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2009/05/15/duke-nukem-forever-may-still-get-released/ I don't know if that's accurate or not...
Enchantermon on 16/5/2009 at 04:04
Interesting, if it's true. I think I can see where Take-Two would be within their rights, then, although the water's still a little muddy if you ask me.
EvaUnit02 on 16/5/2009 at 05:41
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Well, you were the target demographic at the time.
Yeah, I was referring to the social commentary about nazis - the propaganda films, et al. That shit was incredibly obvious even at age 12.
Silkworm on 19/5/2009 at 12:45
Quote Posted by Enchantermon
By (
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/satire) definition, satire doesn't have to be making fun of a genre or mocking clichés and source defects. It could simply be, for example, a movie poking fun at other movies by parodying them, which is what Epic Movie does (I haven't seen the others).
Uh according to the definition you just linked to:
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.
(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlohh3jOTeM) This does not qualify as satire by ANY of the definitions above. It is simply using the structure of the original film as a backdrop to make stupid jokes. Even if you find this kind of stuff entertaining, it's NOT the same thing as satire.
For an example of REAL satire check this out: (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCv1jEe_YrQ) and skip to 1:51. That's real satire, the kind of tradition Mark Twain was part of.
