Well I was a fan since her early days when The World Is Mine was like majorly huge, but I remember the dance covers for that song tended to be pretty faithful to the source material. The dance isn't super complex and is memorable so I understand.
Then recently I fell for the vocaloid world once more when the 3DS game made it here, and I got completely obsessed with a lot of other vocaloid songs, even went on to like Rin more than Miku, but that's another story for another day.
I wanted to see faithful real life person dance a lot of the songs exactly in the way the vocaloids would do it because... well that's just one of those things you want to see irl, much like how you would want to see a person do parkour like a video game character.
There was a song, gaikotsu gakudan to riria on the 3DS game that was a really fast paced and fun song with Charleston as its style. The dance was super fun and catchy as well as matching the theme of the song extremely well.
Well... I searched an irl dance... some bubbly Japanese girls danced to it like some bubbly old pop song and the charm of Miku's dance was entirely lost. I was disappointed.
Now let's go to a more popular song, Tell Your World. Super good song with a very energetic dance on Miku's part, very interpretive and adds to the song. Just Dance Wii U did a pretty good job with their own dance that I also thought was pretty interpretive and had a lot of homages to other dances from Miku. That's good, I don't mind seeing that, especially on a game that requires the player to dance as well, since not everybody can dance like Miku.
Then... the youtube covers. Ok, they're good, and all of the different interpretations people do have the Miku's hand flick into the air thing at that one moment. But would it kill them to have at least one version where it's actually Miku's dance?
I dunno, my dreams of seeing Miku's dances done perfectly irl seems far off, unless you guys can make recommendations. I don't understand why people don't just try to make a perfect recreation of the game's dances though. It's even more f***ing irritating when those live concerts do absolutely jack s*** for songs that have very interesting dances. Rin's Meltdown comes to mind. Very depressing kind of song with a somber and flowy ballet dance. They change it to a pop bubble dance in the live version. Hurray.
March 13, 2016
March 12, 2016
DLC Gold Edition
Sorry to offend anyone here but the "gold" and "legendary" editions of games are marketed towards idiots. Are you an idiot? No? Okay then...
Why do I say this? Because everything you mentioned as a "perk" for the gold edition will be outclassed immediately. Those extra drops? You'll likely be overflowing with extra gear at that point and it means nothing, if you haven't traded in by then anyways.
Only idiots buy those editions, and that's the actual truth.
Secondly, a new AAA game has never been 40$, ever. Maybe a low tier arcade tittle was 39.99$
I sympathize with you, but you are complaining over irrelevant features and options. I bet if you went to buy a new car you'd get sold on the under coating, am I right?
Secondly, video games have been headed in this direction for a longggg time.
Why you ask? Well yeah, it's cause money. Video gaming used to be very fringe, and expensive for that matter.
Mario Bros 3 was a 70$ game and my neighbor could literally beat that game in 30 minutes. Of course he didn't play every level, he used a trick to get the flute on world 1 then skip to the end. My point is, you could beat a 70$ game in 30 minutes with nothing to show, when you turned the power off, all progress was lost.
Now, late 90s early 2000s big developers started taking interest in games, and companies already invited in games, companies like EA upped the anti.
So the trade off is, titles we love are almost undoubtedly eternal with mega Corp backing, the draw back is the nickel and dime us. Day 1 dlc, gold / legendary editions, disc locked content sold as future dlcs.
The point of this story is the gaming industry got sold out long ago. It became less and less about art and creativity to what new idea can be sold as a cash cow.
Like I said though, that's the trade off. When you get games backed by these companies there's a very high chance they will be a round for a long time to enjoy, however they still have to make money.
Now, I am not a frivolous person. I can definitely buy a new release every week, and could care less. I make informed purchase decisions on my tastes because I don't feel a need to waste money. That would be my advice to you, you came in here saying these companies cater to the rich when the difference between 70$ and 100$ is negligible , you say it's pay to win, when in reality those advantages aren't advantages at all.
You are also talking about a video game, but act like we're talking about food or resources.
My advice reevaluate your priorities, though I do agree with some points, while you argue many ate missing your point, I think you have missed the point..
Why do I say this? Because everything you mentioned as a "perk" for the gold edition will be outclassed immediately. Those extra drops? You'll likely be overflowing with extra gear at that point and it means nothing, if you haven't traded in by then anyways.
Only idiots buy those editions, and that's the actual truth.
Secondly, a new AAA game has never been 40$, ever. Maybe a low tier arcade tittle was 39.99$
I sympathize with you, but you are complaining over irrelevant features and options. I bet if you went to buy a new car you'd get sold on the under coating, am I right?
Secondly, video games have been headed in this direction for a longggg time.
Why you ask? Well yeah, it's cause money. Video gaming used to be very fringe, and expensive for that matter.
Mario Bros 3 was a 70$ game and my neighbor could literally beat that game in 30 minutes. Of course he didn't play every level, he used a trick to get the flute on world 1 then skip to the end. My point is, you could beat a 70$ game in 30 minutes with nothing to show, when you turned the power off, all progress was lost.
Now, late 90s early 2000s big developers started taking interest in games, and companies already invited in games, companies like EA upped the anti.
So the trade off is, titles we love are almost undoubtedly eternal with mega Corp backing, the draw back is the nickel and dime us. Day 1 dlc, gold / legendary editions, disc locked content sold as future dlcs.
The point of this story is the gaming industry got sold out long ago. It became less and less about art and creativity to what new idea can be sold as a cash cow.
Like I said though, that's the trade off. When you get games backed by these companies there's a very high chance they will be a round for a long time to enjoy, however they still have to make money.
Now, I am not a frivolous person. I can definitely buy a new release every week, and could care less. I make informed purchase decisions on my tastes because I don't feel a need to waste money. That would be my advice to you, you came in here saying these companies cater to the rich when the difference between 70$ and 100$ is negligible , you say it's pay to win, when in reality those advantages aren't advantages at all.
You are also talking about a video game, but act like we're talking about food or resources.
My advice reevaluate your priorities, though I do agree with some points, while you argue many ate missing your point, I think you have missed the point..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)