Meet the Game Dogs - Chet and Roger
- Thread starter Spinwhiz
- Start date
Sorry, I forget sometimes that the majority of game websites are so corporate these days that the notion that the publisher might make a joke on the forum is hard to imagine.The_Oracle said:
To be clear: I was serious that we are doing a mini-series of Pocket Monsters. I was joking about the top 10 reasons for the Game Dogs, except for reason #4 and #7, which were our actual reasons. Also, it is true that dogs are better than cats, but that's not directly related to Game Dogs, it just is what it is.
Also reasons #11 and #12 we went with dogs:
11) We thought Game Sloths might be taken as an insult.
12) The meercats had unionized.
What about all the accusations that you're getting that the 'trailer' (I haven't watched it, so I'm not taking a side yet), is of poor quality? There are also a lot of people saying they won't watch it since it's 'contaminated with furries' or something like that...that is, if you are serious and this is a real series that will be made on the Escapist.Archon said:
OK. I'll be a bit honest here. The trailer is a bit scatterbrained. It feels like it's jumping from one scene to another without any sort of transition and it is very disorienting. We seem to be seeing a lot of things out of context.
That being said, since I'm voicing 2 of the cast members I've actually been able to see the first few episodes and read most of the script up until about episode 11 or so. Everyone needs to give this series a chance. It has a continuous story line and it gets pretty damn funny. Like Apocalypse Lane, the first episodes are a bit of a slow burn and are basically character introductions. But after that... ho ho ho Jesus.
Kudos Mr. Pitts.
That being said, since I'm voicing 2 of the cast members I've actually been able to see the first few episodes and read most of the script up until about episode 11 or so. Everyone needs to give this series a chance. It has a continuous story line and it gets pretty damn funny. Like Apocalypse Lane, the first episodes are a bit of a slow burn and are basically character introductions. But after that... ho ho ho Jesus.
Kudos Mr. Pitts.
What about them? As the great screenwriter William Goldman said, "no one knows anything." We publish stuff that we like and that we think some audience will like. Sometimes we are right and sometimes we are wrong.The_Oracle said:
There are media companies that use carefully-tuned algorithms to craft content that will appeal to the widest possible audience. They find out exactly what people already want, and then safely deliver it it to them in a nice hermetically-sealed package. Tidy, neat, conservative, safe, boring, and dumbed-down.
That's not our media strategy. In fact, ours is the opposite: We don't create what we already know people want. We (try to) create stuff that's totally different and makes people say "WTF...but awesome." Sometimes we get it wrong and people just go "WTF", of course.
Right now we're getting a lot of "WTF". Hopefully when people see the pilot they say "Awesome." If not we'll re-tool to add more awesome, like we've done on other shows. Sometimes it takes a couple tries.
Wow. I was gonna say... I dunno, something. But seeing how much ire this has accrued with under a minute's worth of footage, I think I'll be giving this a much fairer chance than a lot of Escapists. At any rate, it's got my attention enough to make me want to watch the first episode at the least so mission accomplished.
Now I'm hoping it'll be really good, just to piss all the naysayers off. Guess we'll find out thursday.
Now I'm hoping it'll be really good, just to piss all the naysayers off. Guess we'll find out thursday.
I'd hate to correct my boss on a public forum, but in this case, I feel compelled. We actually do have an excessively complex pseudo-mathematical algorithm we use to determine the specific viewing habits of each visitor to The Escapist. We do this by monitoring everything you do. Every click. Every typo. Every softly uttered curse while you browse.Archon said:
As you can imagine, the quantity of data we have to sort through is incredible. And incredibly time consuming. So we don't bother with any of it. Instead we refer to a simple pie chart (see below) to determine what exactly our users want. And then we act accordingly.
Figure A:
I hope this helps clear things up.
(Disclaimer: This is humor. My views probably aren't representative of anyone, anywhere. Thank god for small miracles.)
I'll be right back. I'm trying to find out if there's a word for how disgusted and furious I am right now. To my knowledge, there is none.
"sharoosed"
"sharoosed"
They weren't, but then the internet came along and ruined everything from peoples childhood.George Palmer said:
ahhh ok. See thats the part I was missing. Fortunately it didn't ruin anything for me. I can see the difference.Bob_Bobbington said:
As far as I can tell...
cartoon animals = not furries. Anthropomorphic maybe, but not furries.
people who dress up like human/animal hybrids on a regular basis or get some kind of sexual excitement from it = furries.
As far as I can tell anyways.
But thats just me, Im a different breed of cat.
Eeeeehhhhh.
Horrible animation - check.
Terrible humour - check.
What is this shit - check.
If the show is like this trailer, then eeeeeehhhhhh.
I have mixed feelings about it, but we'll see how it develops.
Horrible animation - check.
Terrible humour - check.
What is this shit - check.
If the show is like this trailer, then eeeeeehhhhhh.
I have mixed feelings about it, but we'll see how it develops.
