Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics…

I got bullied in school. A lot. Walking the corridors was a nightmare. I rarely made it between classes unscathed. It wasn’t actually the abuse which really stung, though, but the illogical mind-set of the bullies. You can’t reason with the illogical. You can’t make it see sense, no matter what angle you tackle it from. I remember vividly the intense frustration at that.

Decades of both the tabloids and dodgy politicians spewing hysteria, hate and flat-out lies to an audience who can’t be bothered to look out at the wider world, or at history, have come back to bite us.
Just as in school, I feel my fate is in the hands of illogical forces that can’t….couldn’t be reasoned with. An hysterical mob which voluntarily close off routes to all manner of exciting possibilities and progress because they read in some ratty publication that the EU was so invasive and bureaucratic that they even insisted bananas sold in supermarkets be of a specific curve. They believed the idiocy, they bought the lies and are setting fire to the bridges without a second thought.

The effects of the upcoming break from the Union are already being felt, and blame for those effects is already being laid, by the people who voted to leave, at the feet of the EU. They’re too stupid to understand that the EU is acting the way it has ALWAYS done: as a unit to protect itself. A unit that the UK just said it no longer wanted to be a part of.
If you voted “leave”, everything that happens from this point onwards is your own, stupid fault. The plummeting value of the currency, the inevitable recession, isolation on the global stage, the break-up of the United Kingdom and the possibility of war coming to our doorstep; You did this because you didn’t see reason, you didn’t see how being part of a larger community is a good thing. How cultural diversity strengthens a society. You couldn’t see that we were winning the war against the extremists and that they will see our departure from the EU as a victory. You’re blind to the dangers posed by an increasingly unstable Russia and demented US to an isolated Britain.
Once Article 50 is activated, that’s it, we’re alone. All because you were too lazy to look beyond your pint of beer and cheap newspaper.

I had a soft spot for the first Mirror’s Edge. It was a chore, often a nightmare to play because of the clunky controls, but the visuals really won me over. I kept going back to it so I could look across the pretty white vistas and bold-coloured interiors.

I was really quite surprised when a prequel was announced. Surprised, but happy. If the gameplay was streamlined and the combat removed, Mirror’s Edge: Catalyst would be a fantastic environmental exploration game.

They haven’t.

It isn’t.

The carefully designed levels of the original are replaced by a bland open world, which may use exactly the same colour palette but is devoid of the memorable architectural flair.
Combat is not only still present, but even less fun that it was first time ‘round.
And the game is buggy and inconsistent as f**k. Example: At one point, you gain the ability to shut down ventilation fans so that you may pass through. I did so. And then I did so again. I did so several times before I found myself in a situation where I had to run from an enemy. I followed the path the game was highlighting for me, and which took me to a ventilation fan…..which the game didn’t let me disable. It just, literally, did not let me do what it had allowed me to a few minutes earlier, on a path that IT told me to follow. I get killed.

Ya-f**king-hoo.

Also, being an open-world game, there are naturally lots of (thankfully optional) races. I’m not going to call them “missions” or “deliveries” as that would suggest something interesting. No, you just have to get from point A to point B in a set time limit. It’s a f**king race and it is as lazy a f**king design choice as a QTE, recycling an environment so less work has to be done by the developers and making things feel even more tedious.
The main reason for this crap being in here is that there is now a skill progression tree that you need XP to advance, further distancing Catalyst from the elegant and daring simplicity behind the intent, if not achievement, of the original.

If you liked the Mirror’s Edge, stick to that. Catalyst is NOT more of the same. If you liked the pretty visuals, just buy the inevitable art book. It’ll be cheaper and more mentally rewarding.

OK, this is specifically for those of you who live in the UK.
You have until midnight tonight to ensure that you are registered to vote in the EU referendum later this month:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics…

It is imperative that you take part in this, regardless of which way you’re leaning. This is not a general election. This is actually important. We’re deciding on our future relationship with the European Union, and the results are going to have a huge impact upon us.

Personally, I am very much in favour of remaining within the EU. Both the “Leave” and “Remain” campaigners are obsessing over the financial aspects, essentially trying to BUY your votes rather than genuinely WIN them. I don’t believe money is important at all in regards to this issue. As far as I am concerned, it is the concept of a vast, multicultural community that should be at the forefront of the debate. With everything that is going on in the world; unity is the only solution. If we have to pay for it, we damn well pay for it! If the system is broken, we don’t rest until it is fixed!
We should not only remain within the EU, we should start being more aggressive within it.
The UK is not a superpower, but the EU is. Better that we strengthen our relationship with our neighbours than pretend the increasingly demented leaderships of nations further afield won’t roll over us just because London is a nexus of global finance.

I’ve noticed a lot of people bitching about the cost of Overwatch. Even the cheapest purchase option available, the one that I went for, is getting flak for being too pricey for what you get.
I think people are either feeling a bit too entitled or they’re not seeing the value of the product.

I measure entertainment in time, and I measure entertainment time in cinema tickets. A cinema ticket will buy you, on average, between 1.5 and 2 hours of entertainment. Average cinema ticket in my neck of the woods is between £7 and £10.
Using that as a base, a Triple-A video game that costs about £60 should offer at least 12 hours entertainment for it to be considered good value.
Overwatch only cost me £30. I’ve played it for waaaay more than 6 hours so far and Blizzard have said that new maps and characters will be added at no extra cost.
I don’t see any of that as bad.

Keep all that in mind before you kick up a stink about having to pay for something. If you enjoy a product, then damn well support it. The whole “I want it but I’m not going to pay for it” attitude people seem to have will cripple creative’s ability to make a profit one day. No profit, no product.

It’s like Team Fortress 2, just less fine tuned and you have to pay for it.
That’s an accurate assessment, but I don’t think it’s really right to compare the two because of their different approaches to development, and what the final products actually are.
Team Fortress 2 was built, 100%, with gameplay in mind, right down to the visual designs of the different classes. They don’t look they way they do for purely aesthetic reasons, they look like that so each can be identified at a glance (with stupid hats on or not). You will not mistake a Heavy for a Scout. All of those brilliant “Meet the….” animations that fleshed the characters out? Those were developed after the fact and intended to continually promote the product. If those had never existed, the game would still be excellent.
Overwatch, by comparison, is more interested in the concept of character than gameplay. Who the cast are and the world they inhabit are of equal importance as gameplay, if not more so,  because if you take the former away, the latter would feel rather lacklustre.
The game feels less like it’s trying to mimic other class-based FPS games and more like it’s trying to emulate Street Fighter 2, what with the flamboyant and varied cast, special moves and far flung locations. Even some of the promotional images I’ve seen appear to pay homage to the covers of famous Capcom artbooks.
Whether that is something that works is entirely down to the player. If you like to immerse yourself in a fiction, you’ll probably enjoy Overwatch more than someone who is after a well-balanced game, because it’s not quite there yet. And with the special-moves being what they are, it’s not really likely to EVER get there. Victory in any multiplayer game should be down to the skill of the player, not gimmicky and over-powered on-hit kills. A massive dragon that can pass through walls, killing all in its path, or a guided, rolling bomb that wipes out everyone in a massive area, may look deliciously metal, but they feel rather cheap as far as gameplay is concerned. The ability to wait for a meter to reach maximum is not a skill worthy of reward.


Overwatch - 2016


The cover to Capcom Design Works - 2001
Damn, this one was a surprise.
Taken out at 53 by cancer.

uk.ign.com/articles/2016/05/14…

I was always a fan of Cooke's retro take on super heroes. He was the only artist to recapture the original feel of Will Eisner's The Spirit.

Voltron was one of the cartoons I treated as a “big deal” when I was a kid. I watched it as often as I could. I pined for the toys. I drew lots of pictures. Etc.
It….it hasn’t aged well: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uS5b8…

Ninja Turtles ruled the tail end of the 80s, but about midway through: it was all about Voltron and Inspector Gadget.
Well, they f**ked up Gadget, so I didn’t have particularly high hopes when I heard they were remaking Voltron.

And then I saw the trailer: www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdqoQj…

Holy crap, that looks awesome! Animation is being handled by Studio Mir, who brought the wonderful Avatar to life. I think other key creatives from that seminal series are involved in writing/storyboarding, too, so it will hopefully have a good story to go with the visuals.
Fingers crossed!

Sometimes little things make you question answers you already know as fact, spawning absurd little moments of illogical and irrational panic.
When a troll continually claims that it was HE who drew a picture and not me, I start to worry “Wait. I really did draw that, didn’t I?”
Similarly, when someone else swipes your profile picture and claims it’s theirs, I have to take a quick glance in the mirror to make sure I do actually look like that.

twitter.com/MrIanRichards

The fact that he didn’t even bother to remove the “Jolly Jack” logo makes it a hoot - A Tip of the Hat

I called him out on it, and asked if he had the unedited, colour original (which I have sat in my photo archive), after which he blocked me.
I’m not particularly worried about the use of my photo in this case, but “Ian Richards” is a photographer, and if this guy ISN’T him (which is highly probable, as a photographer wouldn’t rip off someone else’s second-rate portrait), he’s taking credit for/using that individual’s work.

EDIT
- He seems to have seen the error of his ways and removed the offending photo. All is well once again :D

I’ve not played a Battlefield game since Bad Company 2, which was also the last release in the franchise I really got excited about. I am, however, feeling a tingle of anticipation for Battlefield 1, because it has the potential to recapture the sheer joy of a much earlier gaming experience.
I was first introduced to multiplayer FPS games at my first gig in the games industry. At the end of each day, the team would unwind by shooting each other on virtual killing fields. First was Half Life, then Quake 3 Arena, both of which were enjoyable enough, but it was another game that I became completely obsessed with: the forerunner to the Battlefield series, Codename Eagle.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYNbTC…

It was ugly as sin, but by god it was fun. First time I dropped into a server, I spawned in a hanger containing a bi-plane. I died almost immediately after that, but not before hearing the whine of aircraft zooming overhead and seeing the world shake as the trail of bombs it dropped detonated one after the other in my direction.
It was awesome and I was hooked.
Battlefield 1942 appeared a little while later, with the legendary Wake Island demo being played almost religiously by myself and my co-workers, but it just wasn’t the same. It was more po-faced, grounded in the real world, while Codename Eagle felt more fun, taking some artistic license with its setting (it was set in an alternate history), and there were no zeppelins.
Zeppelins make everything brilliant.
Now, I know Battlefield 1 isn’t an alternate timeline, but they’re clearly driving the aesthetic down an action movie route, meaning that its multiplayer might, maybe, possibly, feel like Codename Eagle.
If it does, I will be a very happy bunny.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7nRTF…


Zeppelins! F**KING ZEPPELINS!!
Peaky Blinders was one of those series that I was aware was on TV, but never bothered to watch until much later, and was kicking myself for not checking it out sooner.
It follows the Shelby family, who control the titular gang, The Peaky Blinders, and over the course of the first two series, spread their influence from the backstreets of Birmingham, to London and across the Atlantic to Prohibition-era USA. And if you think "Peaky Blinders" is a charming, olde English name: they're called that because they have razor-blades sewn into the peaks of their caps, which they use to cut people's goddamn eyes out.
Think of it as Boardwalk Empire meets Downton Abbey…. only with a much cooler soundtrack: www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGD2N5…

The series has a stellar cast. Notably, Cillian Murphy (the guy who played Scarecrow in the Nolanverse Batman movies) who plays the ice-cold head of the Shelby family, Tommy, Sam Neill (Jurassic Park/Event Horizon) who plays the obsessive Inspector out to stop him and Tom Hardy (Dark Knight Rises/Mad Max: Fury Road), who plays the scariest mother-f**ker in the history of the worldwww.youtube.com/watch?v=BDwoUF… www.youtube.com/watch?v=olwYxX…

It’s well worth a look if you’re a fan of period drama

Season 3 starts this week - www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTQhw3…

Spoiler free opinion? It’s as good as the first Avengers flick, and a perfect example of how you’re SUPPOSED to make a “Vs” movie. Everyone behind Affleck V Superman should be hanging their collective heads in complete and utter shame.

That said, it might not be for everyone. Ever since Winter Soldier, Captain America has been the vehicle we take into the political realm of the Marvel universe. A place where the ramifications of the absurd colliding with the known world are the focus, not capes and powers. Much of Civil War’s opening half is devoted to this, with the demands of the United Nations being levelled at the Avengers and how they elect to respond. All done through logical discussion rather than punching everything. This may put some people off (most likely those who think BvS was quality viewing). I personally love it as it gives real meaning and weight to the super-hero smackdown that follows. A fight which, as we’ve come to expect from these movies, is riotous fun.

The presence of Spiderman in the movie wasn’t really needed and feels a bit tacked on – though that’s unsurprising given that his use had to be negotiated. I’m delighted he WAS there, though, because this may be the best take on him we’ve seen. He’s not a crybaby Maguire or a vengeful, emo Garfield. They’ve made the character fun again. He’s a plucky, enthusiastic kid who is just really, really, really happy to be there.

Marvel have achieved something rather interesting with their movies: they have resurrected the tradition of serial film (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_f…). You can no longer look at them as single works, but chapters in an ongoing arc. At the same time, they are not falling into the trap that ruins adaptations of literary series: cliffhangers. It worked fine back in the 30s when a new installment came out each week, but a movie feels rather unsatisfactory these days if it ends with the story left incomplete and a year long gap before the next chapter. Marvel have got their method nailed: each movie tells a story with a beginning, middle and end. Potential plot threads string off from it, but you’re not left without a conclusion when the credits start to roll. This is why they work so well: they’re fun and satisfying, and Civil War is LOTS of fun and VERY satisfying.

Oh, god, YES!!
When the teaser for Rogue One leaked last year, I found myself more exited about IT than the (then) upcoming Episode VII.
A proper war story set in the Star Wars universe? No Jedi or Force bullsh*t to mess it all up? Why has this not been done before?!
When that siren kicked in…. that scene with the walkers? Sweet mercy, take my money! TAKE ALL OF MY MONEY!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wji-BZ…


pleasedon'tbeajedipleasedon'tbeajedipleasedon'tbeajedipleasedon'tbeajedi
I remember a toy store in the early 90s. When the first VR craze hit, they had one of those weird pod things brought in, and for some absurd price you could wear the massive headset for a little while, look at very early polygonal graphics, and flail around like a blind primate as confused old people pointed and asked what all that nonsense was about.

VR died a death then, and now it’s back. Brought to us by parties who clearly don’t realise WHY it didn’t take off 25 years ago.
It had nothing to do with the expense of the technology. D’you have any idea how much VHS tapes cost in the beginning? No, it had nothing to do with price and everything to do with application.
Just as with Motion Control across the past decade, this current generation of VR will fall by the wayside simply because it does not improve upon, or offer more than, existing technology.
Look at Microsoft’s Kinnect: dead and buried because no one wants to prance around their living room to play a video game when playing it from your armchair with a control pad is much more comfortable.
While the invention of new technologies is all down to brilliant minds, a complete layman can identify which will endure. The question “is it useful?” is all that need be asked.
The ability to watch and record movies at home? Useful.
A phone you can carry with you? Useful.
Touch-screens that remove the need for a separate input device? Useful.
A screen that you stick to your face, blocking out the world around you? Why would I need that when a monitor permits multi-tasking, and doesn’t blind me to the real world?
Granted; total immersion is the whole point of VR, but that’s only really something gamers are after. Proliferation of technology hinges on mass demand. The average Joe NEEDS a screen, but they DON’T need to WEAR it.
VR is a gimmick.

AR on the other hand, is the future. A personal, Heads Up Display has far broader applications than VR, for entertainment, work and general life. It’s tech like Google Glass and Microsoft’s Hololens that we’ll be seeing more of over the next 10 years, and beyond. As it advances, it will offer the same immersion to gamers as VR, but also provide useful services to non-gamers. This wide spectrum of potential users is what past, current and future gen VR does, and always will, lack.


Basically, if you can't see Grandma using the tech, it's probably a dead end.
****Spoilers****

Going into a theatre with very low expectations can often make your movie-going experience rather special. Moments of genius shine brighter, well written dialogue rings like an angelic choir and stylish visuals burn into your memory.
Leaving a cinema after having your low expectations been proven completely and utterly wrong puts as much of a spring in your step as if the highly anticipated blockbuster you’ve been waiting for delivers in full, and then some.
Affleck v Superman does not. There are no moments of genius, the angels remain silent and if you’re after stylish visuals, go pick up Watchmen.
Hell, go pick up Suckerpunch! I’d argue that it makes more sense.

Let me begin by walking you through the film’s opening: we get the usual dark alley/gunshots/pearls/dead parents montage, that I guess is required by law to be in every movie featuring the Dark Knight, in which a better Batman is killed off (Jeffrey Dean Morgan would have suited the role far than Ben “I’m only here because of Argo” Affleck). This is followed by what I thought was the best sequence of the movie: Affleck arriving in Metropolis during the final conflict seen in Man of Steel. For a brief moment, I saw Affleck as the character he was supposed to be playing. It all looked epic and exciting. But then, as with another movie we hoped beyond all hope would be good (Revenge of the Sith), it all falls apart as soon as someone opens their mouth. Affleck calls a guy in the doomed skyscraper he’s racing toward and barks the instruction “Get everyone out of the building”
This is where the illusion-shattering absurdity starts, and continues up to the end credits.
Metropolis is being blasted from above by a giant f**king space-ship, not 4 blocks from Wayne Financial, with neighbouring structures, in full view, falling to the ground, and no one thinks to evacuate the building until the boss of the boss calls and tells them to do so?
“Pointless” is a very good, single-word appraisal of this movie, and summarises much of the dialogue, side characters and screen-time eating events. If all that crap was removed, it would still make sense and be exactly the same movie, only about an hour shorter.
I’m sure that, in the context of a series, elements like The Flash randomly showing up and uttering some cryptic warning will make sense. But this isn’t a series. There’s no guarantee it WILL be a series. The audience doesn’t care about a movie that doesn’t even exist yet, they want the one they’re watching NOW to, at the very least, MAKE SENSE.
“Why” is a perfectly fine question to put in a post-credits stinger, because the story preceding it has concluded.
Why is Nick Fury in Tony Stark’s house?
Why is Agent Coulson out in the desert looking at a mallet?
Why the hell was there a duck in that glass case??!!
No one was up in arms about any of that because it didn’t appear in the middle of the movie. If you put something in the main body of the narrative, you HAVE to address it! It’s just basic storytelling. Unanswered questions annoy those in the audience unfamiliar with the source material, and the screen used is taken away from the characters those who are familiar with the comics came to see.
Maybe if there hadn’t been all that dream and vision garbage, time could have been spent with Batman using a bit of detective reasoning to conclude that Superman was not the real enemy, rather than easing off because “your mommy has the same name as my mommy. I am sad, now”.
And while we’re on the subject of the “real enemy”, why in the name of blue f**k was Jesse Eisenberg playing Jim Carrey’s Riddler?! It was just a gag when I first mentioned it after seeing the trailer, but he really is playing the villain from 1995’s Batman Forever. And his motivation for wanting to bring down Superman was so totally weak! Comic book Lex wanted to bring down the Man of Steel because doing so would bring him more power: the only thing he cared about. Eisenberg’s Lex wants to bring down the Man of Steel because….. his daddy beat him?
Lex is supposed to be a sociopath, not a psychopath. He’s NOT the Joker. He’s not SUPPOSED to be the Joker. And yet, here we have Eisenberg dancing around, acting like a nutcase that a company’s board of directors would have stripped power from long before he had the chance to hatch any kind of evil scheme.

Studios really need to stop trying to reinvent these characters. They have been developed over the course of decades. They are popular and iconic BECAUSE of that fine tuning. Just use it! The hard work has been done! All that is needed is a faithful adaptation of a cherished story-arc and you will have the greatest super-hero movie ever made. It is mind boggling that, after all these failures and with the internet echoing that same truth, this is still not understood.
Yes, at the moment, people will flock to any turd you stick the bat-logo on, but that’s because they love the character, and they hope that this next film might just be the one where the studio doesn’t completely f**k them over. But that flock will shrink with repeated disappointments. Eventually something of note will have to be delivered.


Just go watch World's Finest, will you? It's better. It even has the Joker in it and Kevin Conroy as Batman.
We’re not waiting for the age of the rogue Artificial Intelligence, it’s already here.
Supplied by Microsoft, naturally.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-…

The experimental A.I. was launched on Twitter with the intention that it interact and learn from 18 to 24 year olds.
Within 24 hours, it had become a Nazi-sympathising racist who supported genocide.
While that may say more about the nature of Twitter users than the quality of M$ software, the fact still remains: the A.I. turned evil.
They called it “Tay”. Perhaps it should be renamed “T-001”?

Yeah, I know, Book 4 of Legend of Korra ended back in 2014, but I’ve only just had the chance to watch it.

I’ve voiced my love of the Avatar series before, and I’ll do so again, now. It’s still one of the best cartoons ever to surface. Sure, there’s a lot of anime that comes out of Japan that looks slicker, but either something is lost in translation or the Japanese just aren’t good writers, because the stories and dialogue are usually dire.
Avatar brings us the best of both: quality animation and quality storytelling.
It has me scratching my head as to why more Western animation studios haven't tried to mimic it.

Having finally reached the conclusion of Book 4, though, there is a little something that irks me, and that is the way the relationship between Korra and Asami was handled. Or rather: how it wasn’t.
A romance between two characters (regardless of gender) across a story is something that should be built up to. It is the pay off. Becoming a happy couple is as much of a triumph as bringing down the villain, and requires the same kind of journey to reach if it is to feel authentic and not just tacked-on.
You want people who arrive at that point to be thinking “Finally! They’re together!” not “Oh. So they’re a couple now? OK”.
Look at relationship that we saw between Korra and Mako across the first couple of seasons. It was interwoven into the wider conflicts, and we actually SAW the ups and downs, the break-ups and make-ups.
Compare that to the relationship that “built” between Korra and Asami. It seems to consist only really of Korra telling Asami she wrote her some letters, and that’s it. Sure, Korra also tells her that she missed Asami, but she tells that to damn near everyone at some point.
Not having had the opportunity to watch Book 4 until now, I’d obviously heard about Korra and Asami becoming an item, and I was interested to see how it would be handled. It’s a little disappointing to see that…..it just wasn’t. I really wanted to see their relationship grow closer over the course of the series (and by that, I don't mean: one planting a kiss on the other). In order to reach the point where they hold hands and enter the Spirit Portal at the conclusion, they should have been inseperable over preceding episodes, but they barely spent any time on screen together. And then it’s just over.
I don’t know when the writers decided Korra and Asami were to become romantically involved, but they obviously didn’t have the courage to spring the news on Nickelodeon until the last minute (if at all). As a result, it feels like the storytellers are just shouting “Oh, by the way, they’re in love” [insert car-door-slam/engine rev/tire screech here], which is kinda disrespectful to the characters, and not as “brave” as some people are claiming.

Lionhead, the studio behind the decidedly British Fable games, has been closed by parent company, Microsoft.

www.gamesindustry.biz/articles…

The move means Fable Legends has been axed, which is a shame. I really enjoyed the Fable titles, even the third instalment, which was rather mediocre when compared to the highs of the second.
Lionhead is also a pretty big name to drop. I’d feel a little twitchy today, if I were still working at a studio under M$.

Here’s the trailer to one of 2015’s uber-flops, Pixels:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAHprL…

aaaaand, here’s the trailer to this year’s Ghostbusters.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JINqHA…

I don’t think Sony’s marketing department has actual staff. I think there’s just a piece of software you drag and drop footage into, which then spits out something built to the same formula over and over again: thoughtful music accompanied by text that hints to something epic that has a link to a pivotal moment in history, which is then shattered by “comedy” and CGI.

2016’s Ghostbusters isn’t a sequel, and I just can’t call it a “remake”, because that would be like me saying “hey, I just remade a pizza” after taking a dump. Let’s instead refer to it as a “parody”, because that’s what it is.
The original Ghostbusters wasn’t a comedy. It was a horror movie with humour in it. Everything about it was taken with a level of seriousness and sincerity, not to the point of being po-faced, but more than enough to make it feel “real”. There was a dramatic edge to the concept of three scientists being kicked out onto the streets and having no choice but to try and capitalise on their research. There was something creepy about the pseudo-science Ray and Egon were continually spouting. The other-worldly forces had a very Lovecraftian, “Weird Fiction” whiff to their origins. It all mixed together to make the film feel much more epic than it had any right to be.
It’s something even its creators couldn’t grasp, which is why they themselves screwed the pooch with the more comedy-focused Ghostbusters 2, in which rotting cab-drivers and pant-sh*ttingly scary librarians were replaced with muppet rejects, and everything focused on slime, simply because “he slimed me” had become a catch-phrase.
Ghostbusters 2016 looks to be making all the same mistakes…..and then some. The trailer didn’t make me think “Ghostbusters” at all. My mind actually kept going to 1999’s Inspector Gadget. It’s a goofy, slapstick, unfunny, GCI-overloaded sh*t-stain on the franchise.

The real kicker here is that, 30 years ago, the perfect formula was spelt out in the movie itself. A simple line that would have permitted an endless number of sequels, following a constantly changing cast, in different settings right across the US, and indeed the world:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5C8C1…

“The franchise rights alone will make us rich beyond our wildest dreams”

There could have been Ghostbuster outfits all across the country! One movie could have focused on a team dealing with Chinese ghosts in San Francisco, another could have been like a western, with a squad of Ghostbusters riding horseback in pursuit of unquiet native spirits. Succubi in New Orleans. Mothmen in West Virginia. The list goes on and on. You could DROWN in the potential it offers!
….Or, you could expend no effort or creativity at all in just rehashing the original, gender-bending the cast for no other reason than gimmick, apply bright, family friendly colours and hurl it at the public, hoping that nostalgia alone will do the work.

This movie is getting neither my money nor my time, and you have to do something pretty bad for me to file your work in the same column as Michael Bay.

Every now and then, a game comes along that is so much fun to play, you lose hours of your life to it. "I'll just play for a few minutes" is a phrase followed, quite some time later, by; "Holy sh*t, it's 2am!!".
Games that require player creativity are usually the ones that suck me in. Minecraft was one such game. If I have time to spare, I'll still quite happily spend hours digging virtual holes and building massive fortresses.
Joining it is Factorio.

I first heard about this game from someone visiting my table at a convention. He said I might like it.
The trailer did look nice. It had a retro visual style that reminds me of 90s era Command & Conquer...... just with conveyor belts.
At this point, however, Factorio was only available via the developer's website, and I didn't want to go through unknown channels to get it. Didn't have time to play anyway.
Cut to 2016, and Factorio pops up on Steam, so I nab a copy.

Damn you, random convention-goer. Damn you to hell!!

This game is so addictive!!!!
The premise is simple: you've crash landed on a planet and have to rebuild your ship to escape.....but to do so, you must strip-mine the place by building an ever-more complicated factory. This pisses off the indigenous wildlife, who try to break everything you've built.

The game is worth every penny. Here's the trailer:

Well, I had a blast at the London Super Comic Con.
As always, it was a real kick to meet, face-to-face, fans of Sequential Art, Battle Bunnies, Little Victory and my work in general.
Thanks so much to all who stopped by!

There are a few leftover bits and pieces that I've put up on ebay, should anyone who couldn't make it want to try and grab 'em.

[Sales have ended]