syntheticgerbil

That's even more mean! I don't want to be malicious.

So shitty moral dilemma. One of the artists in the company is having a baby soon and we are all required to purchase $20 giftcards each by the end of the week. She was the art director on one of our projects and I absolutely hated working under her. She was just really slow and bad at her job, as well as just having poor grasps of things like anatomy and color. I also can't stand her on a personal level for various reasons, but mostly she's the product of an extremely sheltered Christian family. She also gets paid over one and a half times my salary. Am I just making stupid justifications and should just pay up, or should I bother saying no? It's just $20 but the principle of the thing is kind of bugging me.

Thank you for that IGN generator. My coworkers and I had some fun the last 30 minutes.

This is my main reasoning for seeing it, first movie at least. I want to see what I think about the increased frame rate without bringing in personal bias. I'm especially curious since we're all used to 60fps as video game players. 60 fps should in theory look good when the frames are there instead of the the frame interpolation nonsense HDTVs do. Jackson is doing 48 fps which seemed kind of arbitrary to just double the film frame rate, but it looks like you guys are saying the reasoning was for what the digital projectors could handle. However in many ways I don't support the notion of upping frame rates because it is hell on animators and effects artists who spend their whole life worrying about how nice each frame looks. Double the frames, double the workload (well 1.5x it maybe). But if a higher frame rate looks good, it looks good and we have to accept it. Also before all of the high frame rate debate on the internet I had no idea soap operas were filmed at 60 fps, thinking they were limited to NTSC standards, but that explains a lot.

Sort of deraling as this thread has made me think of the the part in Grim Fandango where you can constantly interrupt the chant of the Sea Bees by being out of key. Here's a video sort of showing it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OvreuxCh_xQ#t=954s It's possible I'm the only one who got 15 minutes of enjoyment out of doing this over and over again.

Max, I am sending you 20 dollars for the great laughs.

Did you get the job yet?

:tup:

Yeah I think it's more rare for cartoons to do table reads as well, but I'm not really familiar if it happens with other prime time cartoons like Futurama or Family Guy. I know King of the Hill did them as well though. I somehow doubt it ever happens for Saturday morning type stuff. :tup:

According to the Simpsons commentaries I've heard they will often schedule the voice actors to do a scene together plus they generally do a script read through with almost every voice actor in the room at some point. But I've only listened to the earlier episode commentaries and they did note that this was rare especially coming from the cartoon hell of the 80s, which I'm sure it still is in cartoons and games. But I'm sure many of the side characters and smaller roles for the Simpsons don't involve voice actors in at the same time as everyone else. Plus I'm betting it depends on the importance of the scene more emotional weight and such.

I can't think of them off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure there's a few adventure games where some recordings have both actors talking over eachother to achieve that effect. That usually involves getting the voice actors you need in the studio at the same time, which I've heard can be difficult.

Not true at all, you are never forced to work places you don't want, this isn't that kind of country. For instance, a lot of my friend from school went on to do 3D work for oil companies, including the evil Schlumberger (where that particular guy gets 80k a year for simple oil rig models). A lot of them take the jobs simply because in Houston there's almost no other 3D artist type work. That's fine and all, but I do think less of them for making that choice and even then for keeping the jobs multiples of years to be comfortable. If they were even looking or considering different jobs in different cities in the mean time to get out of that kind of thing, I would have respect for their choice as that's what I'd expect of people who need the money (myself included). Not one of these people even believe in big oil either. I personally would work most of my past slightly above minimum wage jobs again than ever compromising my values than take a job like that. It might be in my career path but I'm not looking to seriously allow my creativity contribute to bad karma for the world. You don't have to have a dream job to get a job you at least somewhat believe in. I never said I expected anyone to have the best job ever right out of school. I myself have applied at Zynga, even though I didn't really see an issue with Free to Play until the last six months or so, but after the whole slot machine big business thing they are scheming right now, I will never do it again.

why you gotta bait man why

I don't remember, I think DanJW said it but I don't think it was in reference to IGN, but instead a sleazy game company. Sometimes you have to forgo desparation for integrity either way. Or get that job at IGN as desperation, give it 3 months, then start looking. Finding a job is always hard in most industries, not just games, but it doesn't mean you necessarily have to compromise your values. When someone works for something like IGN or Kixeye, am I supposed to believe they have muted their values for the bro culture or do they truly believe in them? Would that individual want people to be guessing?

Yeah once they invent the hoverboard and then do the BttF throwback version, I'll bite.

BigJKO, I love your style. Every time you update your blog it's fun times.

"We're sorry, the number you have dialed is unavailable from your calling area."

Well depending what kind of art you are interested in, you probably just want to join a good forum that is relevant to what you want to do. If you want to do great digital painting, hang around conceptart.org for a few years. Polycount and Game Artisans might be better for game related 3D art. You could even just connect with some people on Deviant Art you like and just talk. But I don't know, I've only ever learned how to be a better artist by asking someone how to do something that is lightyears better than me. Figuring it out myself or reading about what to do doesn't exactly help because I'll still be working within my comfort zone. I don't think the feeling where you personally feel you are a shitty artist ever goes away though. Every day I do my art for work or myself I have a brief fleeting moment where I feel really proud and then look at something one of my peers did and feel extremely jealous. I often feel frustrated because it feels like it's going to take another 15 years to get where I want to be at right now. It probably will...

This has been spoken about before in some other thread years back but people can choose not to work somewhere. And where someone chooses to work does say something about their character (besides desperate for a job and need money). So with that in mind, I think it's pretty safe to completely write off IGN.com as a whole, editors and writers included. First there's hardly any quality control on reviews or articles in terms of plausibility or being well written so the fact that I would even have to dig around to find something of worth is useless to me. Why should I find the time to search for the good in IGN, what the hell is the point of that? People who do work at IGN are enabling the sexist, overblown, juvenile, and idiotic garbage that spews from their site. Companies have a culture and I would think any sensible games journalist with aspirations would probably not be wanting to land a job at IGN and instead be gunning for Gamasutra. And even on the next level, why would a sensible person want to work for an entity owned by Newscorp? That's just dirty.

Is it? I could swear you are required to spin that wheel. I'm sorry, you don't get the choice to leave the stage.

I'm going to preemptively say thank you because I love things Lorne Lanning says but this is so long I can't read it right now and I want to bump your thread.

First you post a dashing picture of yourself in the, "post your face thread." Once everyone is enamoured with your looks, you could make a thread about anything, even the SEGA Pico, and you would still have full attention.

Haha, well I'm very excited for this game. I will definitely try to bump it up on my list of things to play next year. I feel like this is exactly the type of thing I'd enjoy, even though I can't tell all of the precise parts of the gameplay from the trailer.

So I finally got to this just now. As a big Rayman fan, I have waited too long and my goal next year is to catch up on most Rabbids games (the ones that aren't just a menu of minigames). I'm playing this on 360 by the way, so most games are easier, but the shooters are a little bit harder than the Wii. The problem is if you want to unlock everything past story mode, Rayman Raving Rabbids is cruel. You have to be so near perfect in so many minigames where many are just left up to just one missed twitch button press or some kind of randomization you have no control over. I have no idea what audience they were targeting with this kind of toughness. I have some kind of completion type OCD for many things that I don't fully understand, not just games, but it's definitely a compulsion. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. It usually means stress though. I cannot stand when designers expect me to be perfect or do something incredibly hard just to get the fullest out of the game. I usually end up prevailing out of time consumption and memorization, but Rabbids I might have to compromise for once and do 80% score completion even though in the back of my head I'm going to have the game still marked as incomplete. Luckily I've read about the rest of the Rabbids games as well as asked around and it seems 100%ing the laters ones ranges from ridiculously easy or fair enough. This is a relief for me once I just get past this hump. Plus I've always wanted to get to Rabbids Go Home, I hear it's good. Otherwise I enjoyed the story mode of Rayman Raving Rabbids besides the cop out ending. There's a lot of inventiveness that is fresh to me have not having played any other Rabbids games outside of the platformer GBA, Cell phone, and DS knock offs which are based on the original premise for the Raving Rabbids game where it was basically Rayman 4. And that leads me to my next point. In a way this game makes me very sad. I know Rabbids was completely transformed into a minigame fest for Wii controls, but I never realized how much was scrapped or just repurposed. Upon playing it, I see so much of the platformer Ancel was going to create back in 2006. I now recall how excited I was back then upon seeing the screenshots and videos while coming directly off of finshing Beyond Good and Evil. The story goes the game that the execs forced the game changed, Ancel got angry, and it became the project of other hands. He was given Beyond Good and Evil as a green light but that project is still so much in limbo and rumor mode. So what you get left with is a bunch of strange minigames taking place within dark environments and stranger creatures mixed in with a bunch of obviously later added cuteness. The robots in the shooting levels are extremely cool, but I see compromise when you are just hitting them with plungers instead of something much more epic. Even then there are some other environments that seem very fleshed out more than a game like this would ever need. If you want to know more about this, these links are very interesting: http://raymanpc.com/...lled_prototype) I guess this post is halfway about my personal issues though, so I'm sure everyone else got very different mileage out of the game. EDIT: I read the thread after here and saw the platform game change was already mentioned. Don't feel like editing. Oops.

I don't know who the bottom two are from the right of Klayman. That was really fun to look at. You didn't babyize Larry!