TheMisterManGuy

Well watching the show, the dialogue definitely feels like some abridged version of an anime, like something PurpleEyesFTW would make, only a kid friendly version of one. Well apparently what Cartoon Network is doing currently, is establishing new properties through other means first, before they debut as a show. They're already did it with Mighty Magiswords, which as previously mentioned, was first established as a web series, before making it's premire as a full length series. So I wouldn't be surprised if OK K.O. is getting a similar treatment.

You know what the show feels like though? A legally made abridged series of an anime. In this case, The Slayers. If you want, you could call this "Slayers: The Unofficial Abridged Series".

What are your opinions on Cartoon Network's newest show, Mighty Magiswords, it's based on a series of web shorts that debuted last year, but has just yesterday premired as a full series. Having seen both a handful of the shorts, and an episode of the proper series, I can definitely see this show is going to have acquired taste written all over it. A common criticism so far is that it's too fast paced for it's own good, to an extent, I can agree. What I've from the show was nothing groundbreaking, but it looks like a fun distraction to watch on occasion. Your enjoyment will definitely depend on whether you like fast-paced humor. If you like stuff like None Piece, or Zero Punctuation, you'll probably find this okay. It's fast paced nature does mean the humor is very hit and miss. A joke that land would almost immediately be followed by a joke that fails. But overall, it's harmless sugar rush best enjoyed in moderation. At the very least, it does Teen Titans Go!'s shtick way better. Oh, and Dan from GameGrumps sings the intro theme. Make of that what you will.

In 1996, two cartoons came out that had a lot in common. One was about an average, plain kid and his best friend, who interact with the city, their families, and their eclectic elementary school class, as they learn important life lessons. That being Nickelodeon's Hey Arnold! The other show revolved around an average, plain kid and his best friend, who interact with the city, their families, and their eclectic elementary school class, as they learn important life lessons. Arthur from PBS. Despite a near identical premise and concept, the two are very different in terms of execution and setting. The question now is, which executed it better in your opinion? I myself, am torn, as I've only just began rewatching both series, and they still hold up

I see what you mean. Like I said, Western Developers are more than capable of adding "magic" to their games. I already listed quite a few examples. My problem comes from the fact that publishers act like bloated budgets and grizzled gruff guys are what sells to their target demographic. It's a case of publishers acting like they know what their audience wants, instead of what gamers actually want. Japanese developers can be just as guilty at times too. And I agree with what you said about Dark Souls. It may not be blatantly Japanese, but it has just enough Japanese design elements to help make it a memorable experience, without overpowering it. That's what I like to see more of in the industry. A sort of , give and take style of learning. Japanese and Western developers/publishers should both be learning from eachother, and if that happens, the industry will be a better place for all.

Western developed Video Games have always been stereotyped as generic Space Marine Zombie games, Sports simulators, or DreamWorks style kidware with talking animals. But I always feel this label is unfair. The indie scene alone destroys this argument, and there are some games in from the big publishers that break this mold as well. Which brings me to my point, Japanese style, Western developed games. One thing I like about Japanese games and developers is that even if they reuse tropes and styles sometimes, they always feel very distinct and memorable. Which in turn, helps to foster strong, loyal fandoms, as well as allow potential for a broader market appeal. Recently we've seen this bleed into Western game development more and more. The Indie scene as I mentioned, but also one of the biggest success stories recently, Overwatch. If you didn't know about Blizzard, then at first glance, Overwatch will feel like it came from a Japanese developer. But I think that's a big reason why it's so popular. It's so quirky, distinct, and memorable that it managed to gain a strong fandom, as well as broader appeal, and I'm glad it's doing as well as it has. And I feel we need more games like it. If Japanese developers need to learn some design elements Western developers do well, then Western developers need to learn a thing or two from Japanese developers too. Publishers like EA and Ubisoft need to learn that games are a fundamentally different medium from Film or Primetime television. Not everything has to be needlessly expensive "hard men, making hard decisions" all the time. Or, if you are going to do that, you can add some video game magic and charm to make it more memorable. I think the popular Indie games and Overwatch are what we should see more of from Western developers. Japanese games, while don't always gain mainstream popularity, tend to have a certain charm and distinctiveness that I can usually go back to generations later if only for their charm alone. And they can be permanently engraved in gaming culture just for that. Barring a handful of exceptions, I don't usually get that from Western games. Most of them tend to fade in popularity after a generation or two. Either due to over-saturation, lack of memorability, or in some cases both. Sure The Witcher 3 is awesome now. But is there anything that will make you want to return to it say, 20 years later? Granted, not all Japanese games age gracefully either, but they tend to have a certain magic that can make you want to return to them from time to time, even more Western-like series like Metal Gear Solid and Resident Evil have enough quirk and charm to make you want to return to the games, even if time does effect them from a gameplay standpoint. Ultimately, that's kind of what Western games tend to lack IMO, "Magic". A sense that regardless of time, you can go back and find something memorable about it. That's not to say Western developers are in-capable of such, far from it. Aside from the aforementioned Overwatch and Indie hits, Tomb Raider, God of War, and Mortal Kombat all tend to carry this magic that makes gaming special. But I just think they need to do more work in this era.

Have you noticed that this generation has been eerily familiar to the 32/64-bit generation? In case you don't think so, let's look at the consoles. PlayStation 4 = PlayStation - After being too overly-ambitious with the PlayStation 3, Sony returned the PlayStation brand to it's roots with the PlayStation 4. A big reason the PlayStation succeeded was because it gave developers and gamers EXACTLY what they wanted. A polished, powerful system that was easy to program for. It wasn't so much about innovation or surprising people, it was more about making something for the developers, and allowing them to make what they want, with very few restrictions. All factors that play into the PS4. But critically, Sony was able to capitalize on the competition's poor decisions, luring former fans of competing platforms into their hands. Speaking of which... Xbox One = Nintendo 64 - Microsoft enjoyed a lot of success with the Xbox 360, being the go to platform for all the big core gamer blockbusters. However, the Xbox One at first, much like the Nintendo 64 initially, seemed like a disaster. The problem with the Nintendo 64 was that Nintendo stubbornly clung to outdated draconic policies including sticking with the expensive and bulky cartridge format. This pissed off developers who at this point, were already fed up with Nintendo's big bully attitude at the time. While Microsoft's plans with the Xbox One weren't developer controlling, they certainly were gamer controlling. Microsoft initially wanted to come in and dictate it's users over where they can play their games, when they can play them, where they can trade them in, who they could share them with, and how they can play them and how long they can play them for. This pissed off a lot of gamers who were already weary of the XB1 for being more of a TV box than a games console. But much like how the Nintendo 64 succeeded in the West despite it's limitations, the Xbox One eventually gained a following among gamers after Microsoft scrapped it's initial draconic plans. Though it does have all the major blockbusters, as well as some very popular indie titles, and what is perhaps Microsoft's most refined first party output yet, it still lags behind the PS4 in terms of sales and developer support. Wii U = Sega Saturn - It's amazing how once successful companies, can spiral out of control in only a couple of years. Nintendo enjoyed success with Wii by going after an audience of newcomers, who never really got into gaming before due to the complex nature of modern games. Sega enjoyed success with the Sega Genesis by targeting an edgier, older demographic than the competition with more mature content. The problem with both, was maintaining a long term relationship with those audiences. Sega's string of gimmicky Genesis add-ons, and the botched launch of the Sega Saturn nuked consumer faith in the company, and caused once Genesis fans, to leave the brand. Sega was seen as a fad, a washed up video game icon that succeeded on the novelty of "kewl", only to have their own arrogance destroy their momentum. Similarly, Nintendo's momentum with the Wii was showing it's age with the rise of mobile gaming and Kinect. Rather than adapt to the changing tastes of their consumers, Nintendo instead released the Wii U, a system which nobody, still to this day, can understand. Both the Sega Saturn and the Wii U share the same problems of being too expensive, too difficult to develop for, and more complicated than they really should've been. Filled with useless technology, broken promises, conflicting priorities, and abysmal (and non-existant) marketing, the Saturn and U were massive slaps in the face to Wii and Genesis owners respectively. Costing their platform holders hundreds (in Sega's case billions) of dollars, and admiration. Disappointingly as well, neither platform had a true Sonic game, nor a true 3D Mario respectively. The Saturn instead got a bunch of spin-off games, and the Wii U got an upgraded sequel to a 3DS game with co-op. Not exactly what fans were expecting. All is not doom and gloom however. The Saturn hosted a variety of unique first party offerings from Sega such as Virtua Fighter, Burning Rangers, and the cult classic, Nights into Dreams. Nintendo has also put out solid entries into their Award-Winning first party franchises such as Mario Kart, Smash Brothers, and the groundbreaking shooter, Splatoon. And much like how the Sega Saturn built a surprisingly strong lineup of Japanese 3rd party games, The Wii U gained a cult following with Independent developers, getting most of the big names like Shovel Knight, and Minecraft, as well as some unique exclusives like Runbow. Both of these made up for the otherwise non-existant 3rd party support.

I know there are slice of life anime. But most anime in the genres seem to be the same "kawaii, moe, cute-girls-doing cute-things" type stuff. I definitely like cuteness here and there, but it seems like the moe girls do nothing trope is almost dominating the genre.

Many anime involve kids in unrealistic and idealized scenarios. Especially such original premises like "Generic, loser boy/girl is chosen to be a super hero/magical girl" or "unpopular High School student is suddenly surrounded by tons of beautiful girls, ecchi hijinks ensue", or even "super kawaii, moe girls sit around and do absolutely nothing". Now I'm not saying anime with these set-ups are automatically bad, but we see these kinds of idealized power-fantasy/wish fulfillment stories a bit too often in anime. Which brings me to the point at hand. I'm looking for anime that's encompasses what's a little more real about being a kid. It can have a few fantasy and surreal elements sure, but it needs to actually encompass everyday kid problems, and realistic scenarios, all from the perspective of an average, relatable kid/young teen protagonist. The best comparison I can make is older Nickelodeon shows like The Adventures of Pete and Pete or Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide.

While I don't own a PS4 yet, I have toyed around with one at the lounge of my school. I like it, but the first thing that bugs me is the UI, and the clunkiness of certain system functions. First, the home screen just feels unintuitive. Having all your apps in a single ribbon and having to constantly scroll to the right just feels tedious. I wouldn't mind this so much, if you had any customization options. Sadly, while you can change your theme, that's about all the customization you seem to get. You can't arrange the apps displayed, you can't make folders to organize, you can't alter the grid, what you see is basically what you get. Making matters worse, the touchpad isn't even supported for navigation, at all. So an already clunky UI is made even more clunky by the limitations of the analog stick. But the most annoying thing is the way it handles certain functions, particularly when it comes to closing apps, and power options. You know how on iOS or Android, or hell, Windows 10, putting the device in sleep mode is instantaneous, and closing apps is as simple as swiping your finger, which also feels instantaneous. Well, things aren't like that on the PS4. What should be second nature, feels like a hassle. First, to close apps, you have to hold the PS button, scroll down to the app you want to close, press X to close, oh wait. It has to ASK if you want to close, then you confirm, and wait up to 10 seconds for it to close the app. How is that even remotely intuitive? And sleep mode? Don't get me started on that. You hold the PS button, scroll down to the rest mode option, confirm rest mode, then you wait for the system to go to sleep, before it actually does. Pressing the power button on the console is useless too, as it still feels like it needs to take it's good old time entering f***ing sleep mode. Again, what's usually instantaneous on our mobile devices, feels needlessly clunky on the PS4. These wouldn't really be problems if Sony would just let us use the touchpad to navigate the damn thing. They could've easily took the lessons the mobile platforms taught us when it comes to UI design, and simply applied them to the living room. Hell, they could've easily taken lessons from the 3DS, which by this point, has the most well designed UI on a gaming platform so far IMO. But instead, they chose to gimp cool features with archaic UI principles. These are just my opinions though, so I'm interested to see yours.

Cartoon Netwrok Puts out good shows on a more consistent basis. Sure there are stubles like Go! and Diet Powepuff, but there's always good stuff like Steven Universe and We Bare Bears to balance out the crap.

So, at this point, it's clear people don't like the new Powerpuff Girls reboot. I can definitely see why. It's not awful, but it's painfully bland. People are complaining about memes, Ms. Bellum leaving, and that transgender episode. But I don't think many people are discussing the real problems with the show. The real problem with The Powerpuff Girls 2016, is that it tries to be everything to everyone, but fails to do anything particularly well. It took me a while to notice this, but yeah, this show's biggest problem is that it's trying to bite off more than it can chew. Their first mistake was setting the show in the same continuity as the OG series. I would be fine if this was a sperate universe like Powerpuff Girls Z, but no, it's the same universe as the old show. Because of this, they have to explain a lot of the changes made to the show in universe, like how the girls got to a new school, why Miss Bellum isn't there, etc. I get why they did this, it's an attempt to make it authentic to the OG series, but I don't think reusing the same universe was the best approach. This brings me to mistake #2, it tries way too hard to be the old series, yet it lacks the creative spark the old show had. They even go as far as to recycle plots from the old series. Again, I get they want to be as close as they can to the old show, but don't just copy-paste what's already been done if you do nothing unique with it. Speaking of which, Sin number 3 is the new stuff they added. It's either dated, poorly done, or been there done that by other, much better Cartoons, or sometimes, all three at once. Look, cartoons like Steven Universe have tastefully handled serious topics like lesbian relationships. But just because Steven Universe can do it, doesn't mean you're capable of doing it. Same with the other things they try to do. I've already seen the Surrealism Adventure Time, the character interactions and sibling rivalry of Gravity Falls, the Superhero girl power of Star Vs the Forces of Evil, the topical modern day humor of We Bare Bears, the morals of MLP, the slice off life kid shenanigans of Harvey Beaks, even the whispering and visual gags have been done by Teen Titans Go! All of these have been done better by other current cartoons. If want to be a greatest hits collection fine, but don't just include every joke, style, and story technique of every current Cartoon known to man just because "I dunno, everyone else is doing it" That brings me to the biggest problem, this show lacks a clear identity. Add I mentioned before, it's trying to be everything to everyone, but it ends up pleasing nobody. As a result, the show lacks a clear vision. As bad as TTG! is, it at least had a clear focus for what it wants to do. This doesn't. What we instead get is a nutered mess that can't decide if it's a reboot, sequel, reimagining, or its own thing. It's basically just the old PPG, but with less action, comedy, and creativity. So that's what's REALLY wrong with PPG 2016. On it's own, it's an average, if bland and unpolished series. But as a reboot, it feels like a hollow imitation with nothing else going for it. As for how the show can improve? The answer is super easy, just be yourself. Don't try and be the old show, and a mash up of current Cartoon trends at once, tell your own stories, trail your own path, take the characters in the direction you want to take them in. Yeah, that's a big risk, but hey, you would at least end up with a much more interesting show. PPG Z did it, and while I can't say it's a good series, it's at least different.

If you want a good throwback to that classic Nickelodeon magic, I recommend checking out their newest Cartoon, The Loud House. Like I said, a great return to what made Nickelodeon unique and special.

Honestly the biggest thing I come to dislike about this show is that it just feels bland and uninspired. It's unable to stand on it's own. Say what you will about Teen Titans Go! It at least does it's own thing without any regards to fan reception or the original series. But this show just feels like it's playing it way too safe for it's own good. Whenever it try to do something new, it either blows up in its face, or feels been-there-done-that by other Cartoons. While it's far from terrible, it's still not particularly good. I'm still hoping the series will improve soon, because there are some good ideas in it. They just need to focus less on trying to be the original, and more on just trying to be it's own thing. Also the reason they gave for Miss Bellum's absence made absolutely no sense. If she didn't fit the vision you wanted to go for, then you an at least fill us in on that vision, instead of giving us some vague cop-out answer.

I wouldn't say terrible. What I've seen wasn't the worst thing ever, or even that awful. I think it's biggest problem is that it tries way too hard to be like the old show, but forgets what made it work, while anything new it tries either feels dated, generic, or has already been done and done better by other Cartoons. On it's own, it an average, if bland series. But as a reboot, it lacks the energy and creative spark that made the original so great.

There have been 2 companies that have been fierce rivals in children/youth entertainment for years. The Walt Disney Company. And Viacom's Nickelodeon. In the 90s and early 2000s, these 2 went head to head with their extensive arsenal of Films, TV Networks, brands, and auxiliary ventures. However, what really seperated them and made them unique? IMO, the same thing that made Sega and Nintendo unique from each other. Disney was about polish, tradition, and broad, universal appeal, not just for kids, but the entire family (this would be Nintendo). Nickelodeon however, was more about cool factor, risk taking, pushing the envelope, and connecting with it's audience more (this would be Sega). Moreso though, was how they approached children's entertainment. Disney was about a certain way of looking at childhood. Optimism, comfort, occasional hardships, and happy endings. Their movies reflect this. Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King, etc. all share this style. Even it's Disney Afternoon shows and recent Disney Channel kid-coms are built on these principles. Nickelodeon however, was more in-your-face with it's style. Their content was more about real world scenarios and/or adult stories told from a kid's point of view. I mentioned this before, but The Adventures of Pete and Pete is a great demonstration of what made Nickelodeon so special. It's a seemingly normal environment, twisted and warped in a kid's perception. Now there are exceptions for both sides. Shows like Lizzie McGuire, Even Stevens, More recent cartoons. And movies like Max Keeble's Big Move are all Disney's attempts at mimicking the Nickelodeon style. While Nick's more recent Live-action shows and movies are built on Disney-style idealism. But aside from that, these are what I feel separated them. What do you think made them different, and which did you prefer as a kid?

Yeah. It's pretty fun so far. It really brings back that old school Nick magic that's been missing from the network for years.

I'd be easy to write Nickelodeon, from any period, off as just another children's network. But there was one thing that made shows like Hey Arnold, Doug, Pete and Pete, Alex Mack, Avatar, Ned's Declassified, and even Rugrats feel fresh from other kids' shows. The unique child perspective. That was what seperated Nick from the likes of competetors like Disney. Their programing wasn't so much about capturing the whimsy of childhood, rather, Nick's shows were more about shows with real world scenarios, interpreted from a kid's point of view. Pete and Pete is a good example of that classic Nickelodeon magic. The show's oddball style came from the fact that it envisioned seemingly mundane situations, as child-like surrealism from the perspective of the eynponomus characters. From a kid's view, a Brain Freeze can feel like a massive trip, school bullies seem like supervillains or wild animals, and Adults can seem either totalitarian, or just plain weird. That was what made that show, and Nick in general, so unique. Now flash foward today, with newer shows like Harvey Beaks, and The Loud House, could Nick be returning to this older style of story telling?

Sort of. Basically take something like this https://youtu.be/LSgy8Loi1c8 And somehow turn that into a video game.

Well, Shenmue despite being grounded in reality, still had a complex story, with the goal of beating up bad guys and saving the day in addition to it's more relaxed moments.

There have been life Sims like Animal Crossing before. But even in life Sims, they still have some weird, fantastical element to it. However, what if there was a realistic slice-of-life game, completely grounded in reality. No quirky animals, no fantasy setting, no super-serious, complex story, no combat, no bad guy, no save the day and get points. A game that was down to earth, simple, and was really just about living the day to day lives of regular, no frills, relatable characters. The best comparisons I can make are TV shows like The Weekenders or The Adventures of Pete and Pete. A sort of, Interactive sitcom if you will. Could a game like that actually work? And be a success?

Well Sony's first party games at least try to make use of the DS4's features. And some 3rd party games have an option for them. But you are right that developers don't want to put for the extra effort or resources to take advantage of unique features if it means making an exclusive that may or may not sell or, gives the competing platform an unfair advantage. It's the same reason why a lot of PC multiplatform games are locked at 30 fps as opposed to 60 fps or higher. The PC is more than capable of it, but publishers want their games to be on a more or less, equal playing field for all platforms. I feel one of 3 things need to happen. Either A. Gamers be more accepting of the benefits of these "gimmicks" B. All platform holders implement the same exact inputs as each other C. Publishers and/or developers man up, and stop playing it so safe all the time. It's easy to say touch and motion controls are gimmicks because they're underused or differentiate from the norm. But if gamers and publishers allow for more leeway, maybe they can be more than gimmicks. I always believed that innovation comes from both software AND hardware, and we can't just get by on only stick, triggers. And buttons forever, not when other input methods have some clear advantage s and potential.

Well I think the fault in that lies in both the platform holders, and the developers. Developers don't want to make the effort to take advantage of what could be, a superior input methoid for one platform if it means the other gets gimped, either that or publishers don't want them to, or they're just lazy (hard to tell). I also blame the platform holder for not having a simillar control inputs. If the Xbox One controller had a touch panel, and motion capabilities, then those same features in the DualShock 4 would be used much more often, because both sides are now on a more or less equal playing field. Same with Nintendo, although with their dual screen phillosphy, they may stand out a bit more. What I'm trying to say is, these feature won't truly become viable unless all the platform holders are on board.

Well I'd argue that a touch panel like the one of the DS4 can add a big improvent to stuff like map navigation, and even aiming. It baffles me as to why developers are STILL limiting themselves to dual analog shooters. It's been proven multiple times that aiming with a mouse, IR pointer, or some sort of touch input is far faster and more precise than dual analog aiming. Motion controls are also great for racers, sports games, puzzles, and tilt based games too. So gimmick can have good uses.

I won't say the Xbox One controller sucks. It feels nice, and is comfortable and responsive. At the same time, I feel it's a bit... Behind compared to other control inputs. With a few very minor exceptions, the Xbox controller has not evolved since the OG platform. There's no motion or gyroscopic sensors, nor is there any touch input. Sony at least has the foward-thinking to equip the Dualshock 4 with a clickable multi-touchpad and motion capabilities. Valve is at least trying to bring the precision and customization of PC gaming to a console style controller, and we already know about Nintendo and their bizzare contraptions. The point is, I feel the Xbox One controller seems limited and dated by comparison. I know the old saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it, but when most of your closest competitors are trying to take game control beyond just the generic sticks, triggers, and buttons, I think it's time to start following in their foot steps. No, Kinect doesn't count.