Duck and Cover Forum Index


Use these links, buy stuff from Amazon and help us out, nubs.
Amazon.com | Amazon.ca | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de
  Duck and Cover  •  FAQ  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log in

 Support DAC!
 FO d20 art View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topicReply to topic
Author Message
Rosh
Desert Strider
Desert Strider


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 812

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:58 am Reply with quoteBack to top

PiP wrote:

only did that to contrast the modern-looking T-shirt and pants' style with 50's trousers and short-sleeve shirts' style.


I was mostly remarking upon the amount of..."research" done for these pieces, and found it to be as expected. Minimal, and what is present, dismal. As for disproving the styles with some conventional 50's attire, it would be even more comical to compare them to the proper styles of earlier times, from the 40's and maybe a bit earlier, as science fiction doesn't always carry fads as lasting. Usually, that which exists into familiarity is used, which is ~10-20 years. Fallout was hardly as colorful as the 50's...or the 60's...or the 70's...etc.

Quote:

Obviously the "strict 50s style" I posted on only appears in Fallout in few places, but this doesn't justify doing a character that looks like from the late 90s or later.

let's see, where did this idea (of that modern clothing) come from?


Oops...

Then there's the bare midriff thing, etc. that further makes this into a laugh belonging into someone's high school notebook art collection. Which, "Bored in 5th Period Economics" might explain why there's an ignorance about background subject material.

Tensen01 wrote:

Oh, and for Post-50s style with the City Dweller... Why not? Very few of the Talking Heads in the game had 50s influence,


Really.

Quote:
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9497/greaseal0.jpg


Wow...nobody looked like that in Fallout! Of course, most people probably missed Ian because they were being shot in the back...
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:02 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

haha I was thinking exactly 'Ian' when I looked at Marlon Brando in narrow jeans and a biker's leather jacket over a tight, dim white t-shirt, and at the boys in the 'grease' photo - apparently modelled after him.

Also those random-encounter Ian clones icon_wink

Anyhow, nobody had puffy pants in Fallout. Well except those wearing a PA icon_wink
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Shamer
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:08 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Rosh wrote:
Quote:
Then why is Fallout uses a lot of Art Deco; to show the artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalization through art, in ruin.

Sorry what?!
Is that your own opinion or can you back it up by some statements from the original Fallout development team???

Furthermore:
Quote:
Science fiction is never really about current popular culture, because those infatuated with such are not entirely likely to be watching science fiction in the first place.

Could you elaborate on that coz it strikes me as a vague generalization (if true at all), substantiated by an argument that is invalid. Still this is probably academic discussion as your interpretations of "SF" and "current popular culture" are bound to be different than mine.

Quote:
Science fiction from that period is often about taking familiar elements and giving them a twist...

What do you mean? All SF is like that.

And:
Quote:
To further supplement this, science fiction is a device of escapism, and therefore little of reality would pertain to the piece. If the piece was mocking of "modern" concepts, usually in a sociological context, then it's usually with a really exotic element with the modern "accepted elements" twisted, and a new reality based upon that.

Which "reality" do you mean in this context?
Anyway, I don't know where you taking this giberish from - I'm getting slight whiff of post-structuralism here. Which is fine, but surely you must be aware that that's only one of the possible interpretations.
View user's profileSend private message
atoga
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member


Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 5421
Location: Coney Island

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:18 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Quote:

Sorry what?!
Is that your own opinion or can you back it up by some statements from the original Fallout development team???

art deco is one of the predominant styles of architecture used in the original fallout, along with googie (actually, i think googie is a lot more prevalent). the hub & the boneyard are both good examples of this styling.

if you like, some reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retro_futurism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googie

i'm not going to get into the more abstract stuff about this whole fallout styling debate because it's been discussed to death, and it's really not that interesting. the retrofuture article should be a good primer though.
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:15 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

hmm didn't Poseidon powerplant look more or less like this?
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Shamer
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:46 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Atoga,
and who says they aren't. I know both styles (had my share of Dan Dare and I'm a massive fan of the Watchmen - to give more contemporary occurence). I'm sure they were discussed at lengh.

I was questioning the whole sentence. Because I want to know whether that's Rosh's personal statement or whether game designers stated that they decided to use that stylistics to enchance the notion of "artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitaization through art, in ruin". This statement in this context strikes me as odd and I wanted to know where it's coming from.
View user's profileSend private message
Rosh
Desert Strider
Desert Strider


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 812

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:13 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Shamer wrote:
Rosh wrote:
Quote:
Then why is Fallout uses a lot of Art Deco; to show the artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalization through art, in ruin.

Sorry what?!
Is that your own opinion or can you back it up by some statements from the original Fallout development team???

I was questioning the whole sentence. Because I want to know whether that's Rosh's personal statement or whether game designers stated that they decided to use that stylistics to enchance the notion of "artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitaization through art, in ruin". This statement in this context strikes me as odd and I wanted to know where it's coming from.


First, the developers have stated the setting enough times themselves, to which I mirror. The 50's had a period of Art Deco that would have been in the mind of a 50's sci-fi author, because they are aware of the world PRE-50's, and would show familiar items in ruin. It is also pretty obvious just from PLAYING THE FUCKING GAME.

Why don't people bother to fucking THINK for themselves?!

Or even wonder what would be in ruins in the eyes of an author who lived and probably grew up in the time of the Art Deco movement. Or even tried to grasp the concept of a "post-apocalyptic setting as envisioned by a 50's science fiction author, and designed in a style reminiscent of EC Comics", but I guess thinking is involved there as well.

Quote:

Quote:
Science fiction from that period is often about taking familiar elements and giving them a twist...

What do you mean? All SF is like that.


Not entirely, some is about pure speculation of wholly unheard-of things.

Jules Verne pwns your ass from beyond the grave.

Quote:

Which "reality" do you mean in this context?
Anyway, I don't know where you taking this giberish from - I'm getting slight whiff of post-structuralism here. Which is fine, but surely you must be aware that that's only one of the possible interpretations.


Sorry if I actually have studied science fiction from the entirety of the last century. Go rent The Matrix again and be mesmerized, as it appears nothing I say is within understandable context for the plebeian. :roll:
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:34 am Reply with quoteBack to top

So Verne didn't emplpy the 'taking familiar elements and giving them a twist' technique? Flower, please.. icon_chuckel
Rosh wrote:
Sorry if I actually have studied science fiction from the entirety of the last century. Go rent The Matrix again and be mesmerized, as it appears nothing I say is within understandable context for the plebeian. :roll:
Gettin worked up over someone poiting out your argument is poor and vague? icon_giggle Oh come on Rosh, you know you're too experienced for that icon_drunk
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Shamer
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:29 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Rosh wipe that foam off your mouth coz I'm not fazed by your exasperations, save them for other forum users who actually will engage you in a barking session.

Quote:
First, the developers have stated the setting enough times themselves, to which I mirror.

I bet. It's not my point. I was interested in the "artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalization through art" bit. Not what it means or what you think you mean, that I understood all along. Read your statement once again and take responsibility for its lack of semantic and argumentative cohesion. Your sentence wants to mean: "fallout setting is designed to demonstrate the collapse of past (hence familiar) forms. The designers wanted to enhance this sensation of familiarity by tapping into iconic stylistics of art deco and that is why that particular style is emulated in the game" Does this decipher your statement somewhat - is that what you wanted to say? Can anyone suggest any further translation? But seriously, back to my original question, and recovering from the opaque state of mind where "artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalisation through art" seem to take us icon_wink. I asked whether you could substantiate the said statement (translation above for reference) with any official developers' comments or is it just your interpretation. The reason being that, even if it is valid (to a degree), it highlights only one facet (or function) of said stylistics in the game and thereby your statement (intended as an educational instruction for artists trying to imitate) only partially illustrates the canonical paradigm the artists are suppose to work in. Still an interesting point (noted)

Quote:
The 50's had a period of Art Deco that would have been in the mind of a 50's sci-fi author, because they are aware of the world PRE-50's, and would show familiar items in ruin.
How illuminating! Now is this some sort of ill-conceived courtesy that you trying to simplify things for me, or are you truly a simpleton. Before anything else do yourself a favour and refresh your art deco reference, trust me you will know why. By the way is English not your first language (if that's that case I apologise it's not meant to be offensive) or is it the case of poor editing? icon_wink coz lack of cohesion rears its ugly head again.

Quote:
It is also pretty obvious just from PLAYING THE FUCKING GAME.
Again oversimplifying, my experience of playing the game and , pay attention now, I'm talking purely of my experience of the aesthetics of the game (along with its stylistic connotations and references) is different than yours. Interacting with anything means that your input is combined with the sensory information supplied by the object of interaction. As a result it is always subjective and even universal elements are accessed differently. Relevant example: My frame of reference for art deco, retrofuture or what have you is bound to trigger different aspects and lead to conclusions which might be similar (we share the culture) but not identical (we don't share intellects - luckily).

Quote:
Or even wonder what would be in ruins in the eyes of an author who lived and probably grew up in the time of the Art Deco movement. Or even tried to grasp the concept of a "post-apocalyptic setting as envisioned by a 50's science fiction author, and designed in a style reminiscent of EC Comics", but I guess thinking is involved there as well.

I won't even comment. Your attempt at being provocative strikes me as comical. Unfortunately it's highly speculative and therefore not worthy of discussion. Oh and you can drop the EC comics reference as well, we get the message – “Rosh is aware of the EC comics style” – superfluous.

Quote:
Not entirely, some is about pure speculation of wholly unheard-of things.

Jules Verne pwns your ass from beyond the grave.


Good form!, PiP grasped the fallacy immediately - still sharp old friend, still sharp... ;D

as for Rosh, dog's bollocks mate - your "speculation about unheard-of things" is simply putting a new slant on ideas usually predating or contemporary to the author (research)

Jules Verne was innovative because he used that technique for his fiction but his ideas weren't original - which is easy to prove - but here's an intellectual exercise for you: look it up yourself, you're a game designer you know how to do research. I'll give other honourable forum participants who follow this friendly bout, few hints:

20000 Leagues Under the Sea - thee concept and primitive technology of the underwater exploration existed even before Verne. His contemporaries experimented with iron-cast diving bells (which date probably to late middle ages), the aerodynamics and iron coating was at that time being introduced in military vessels and many other aspects. Verne vision is extremely imaginative - but for different reason that the technology itself, rather its impact and application.

From Earth to Moonjourney to moon with the use of cannon technology another twist on a well known concept.

There is more of course and I'm sure you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Quote:
Sorry if I actually have studied science fiction from the entirety of the last century. Go rent The Matrix again and be mesmerized, as it appears nothing I say is within understandable context for the plebeian. :roll

I salute you! That's very nice. You must know then that sf is not purely the 20th century phenomenon and is origins can be traced earlier, of course you know Verne! You surely must have studied the literary theory, and discourse analysis as well, which as you well know, provides various methodologies to analyse any text (fiction here). Have you? If you had you would have understood that my allusion to post-structuralism was giving merit to your statement, but you failed to grasp that, offering a dismissive and slightly insulting remark(although more sophisticated than your vintage half-wit banter icon_wink ) May I infer than that you've LIKE studied SF but remain ignorant to how the literary discourse functions, and yet you offer validating statements intended to educate other forum users whose views you either disapprove or can't understand?

Don't worry it's not too late! Start with E.A.Poe (his works of literary criticism not fiction), and go from there. It's a fantastic quest, be warned the path is perilous and winding. Many a time you will ward off treacherous confusion. But hey it's fun, fun, fun ;D

Now, knowing your furious temper, it's highly probable that by know you're nearly spastic with rage, but before you succumb to your frantic urges to obliterate anyone who questions your authority, take a deep breath, relax for a moment... Found your little fluffy place? Fantastic. Now consider this, but truly do. You are not omniscient and infallible, no one is, myself included. (I'm merely a scholar of literature and culture not a recognised authority) So if you offer a valid (I stress relevant) refutation I will be more than willing to admit that I see your points (which I have don many times following your posts) I might even agree with some of them, but don't yourself speak of things which you obviously know very little about (which is something you very often throw at ppl), stick to what you know like say game design technicalities, and use that impressive knowledge to contribute. I would appreciate it.

With that happy note. Farwell fellow listeners and may the gods of wasteland protect you (just kiddin smile )
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:21 pm Reply with quoteBack to top


rofl
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Rosh
Desert Strider
Desert Strider


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 812

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:15 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Shamer wrote:
Rosh wipe that foam off your mouth coz I'm not fazed by your exasperations, save them for other forum users who actually will engage you in a barking session.


Maybe it's just my disgust for yet another presumptuous asswipe that has to spend more time arguing than reading in context.

Quote:

Quote:
First, the developers have stated the setting enough times themselves, to which I mirror.

I bet. It's not my point.


It's what you asked for, dipshit.

Quote:

Is that your own opinion or can you back it up by some statements from the original Fallout development team???


Pity. Not even a page has gone by yet, and you're this shitfaced in an argument.

Quote:

I was interested in the "artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalization through art" bit. Not what it means or what you think you mean, that I understood all along. Read your statement once again and take responsibility for its lack of semantic and argumentative cohesion.


In context with the Art Deco movement, that is exactly what it was meant to mean. The Art Deco movement, from a couple of decades past, was a cultural revival, a "revitalization through art" of the country. Since the 1930's and before was before the 1950's, and the 1950's was going into more Googie styles, then it would mean that Art Deco was from yesteryear. "In ruin", which you conveniently left out, was also added to give context, because the game is post-apocalyptic. Put in context, it means that the styles of the last couple of decades were put into ruins for art reasons, to fit into the post-apocalyptic universe.

Context, dipshit, context.

Is that clear enough for you now? Or did you suddenly forget that we were talking about Art Deco, just like you forgot that you wanted to know what the designers of the game said?

I am sorry I don't dice it into layman's terms for you to begin with, but you're the one who wanted to butt into the conversation, it's your obligation to educate yourself a bit. Do not presume to make it my fault you're an ignorant shit and want me to spoon feed you the information. It's not my fault you can't work a dictionary and yet want to spend a few paragraphs...

Quote:
(Snip a load of pseudo-intellectual babble that amounts to you waffling around having to have the concepts of the setting yet again explained for a newb that can't understand context, to having to be pointed out that the designers and Chef Boyarsky themselves have stated such, to blah, blah, blah, shut the fuck up, newb.)


Quote:
How illuminating! Now is this some sort of ill-conceived courtesy that you trying to simplify things for me, or are you truly a simpleton. Before anything else do yourself a favour and refresh your art deco reference, trust me you will know why. By the way is English not your first language (if that's that case I apologise it's not meant to be offensive) or is it the case of poor editing? icon_wink coz lack of cohesion rears its ugly head again.


Three-part sentences of items listed in context, or three items to be reflected upon in the same train of thought. Yet we seem to be aware that you're failing at context. Shall I shut up about that as well, or do you want me to not put things in context for you, and then you gripe at me putting them in context, and then now you're complaining because I have to explain myself at a depth you're unfamiliar with? That is what is called an "event list", a list of items in sequential order. I could very well go on about your over-simplification I mocked above, but I think it did a far sufficient job of...oh, hey, doing it again. Tell you what, come back to this thread when you have an understanding of context, and have the ability to understand things for yourself and know how to research things for yourself.

I know I type in a manner that violates a few "rules" of English, but that is due to programmer habit. Such as putting "quotes right before a comma", rather than including the comma, due to structural form of programming.

Quote:
(More pseudo-intellectual bullshit.)


Except that I can point out that in context with the designer's plans, as I now remind you for about the third time. I can also note that every Fallout game is pretty much the same. So, given those two facts, it is my obligation to educate you upon matters you seem to have little familiarity with, and then you decide to presume it's my fault for your ignorance or failure to read in conext?

Amusing.

Quote:

Quote:
Or even wonder what would be in ruins in the eyes of an author who lived and probably grew up in the time of the Art Deco movement. Or even tried to grasp the concept of a "post-apocalyptic setting as envisioned by a 50's science fiction author, and designed in a style reminiscent of EC Comics", but I guess thinking is involved there as well.

I won't even comment. Your attempt at being provocative strikes me as comical. Unfortunately it's highly speculative and therefore not worthy of discussion. Oh and you can drop the EC comics reference as well, we get the message – “Rosh is aware of the EC comics style” – superfluous.


So what's your problem in understanding it in context? Remember, you're the one who started with sand up your twat and can't seem to be bothered to apply context. Do not presume to make it my fault.

Quote:

Quote:
Not entirely, some is about pure speculation of wholly unheard-of things.

Jules Verne pwns your ass from beyond the grave.


Good form!, PiP grasped the fallacy immediately - still sharp old friend, still sharp... ;D


I will admit, he didn't write entirely un-heard of concepts, as some of his works used familiar parts of common life to people as a launching board. Such as...a boat or submarine. The wholly new part would be ...well, I'll get to that later, because you amusingly missed it. At the time in fiction, many of his concepts were like first inventing the idea of the robot or a flying saucer.

Just because you know of these concepts now doesn't mean that they were common then. Same thing with Art Deco and subjects in the eyes of a 50's science fiction author, familiarity is used for certain reasons.

Quote:

as for Rosh, dog's bollocks mate - your "speculation about unheard-of things" is simply putting a new slant on ideas usually predating or contemporary to the author (research)

Jules Verne was innovative because he used that technique for his fiction but his ideas weren't original - which is easy to prove -


And there your bullshit trail ceases to have any merit when put into context of the fiction period and the knowledge of the common man. One of the major parts of SCIENCE! (actually look that up, I know you have no clue) is taking a small bit of truth and making wild speculation upon it. Much like the concept of THEM!, EC Comics (hey, context AGAIN, dipshit!) took many...well, INSANE ideas at the time, and started out in a setting, and from there added conventionally unheard-of things to it.

So...where did the idea of radioactivity causing giant mutations come from? Oh, I know! It must have been Alice in Fucking Wonderland, from the same shroom you're on.

Quote:
but here's an intellectual exercise for you: look it up yourself, you're a game designer you know how to do research. I'll give other honourable forum participants who follow this friendly bout, few hints:


This should be entertaining...

Quote:

20000 Leagues Under the Sea - thee concept and primitive technology of the underwater exploration existed even before Verne. His contemporaries experimented with iron-cast diving bells (which date probably to late middle ages), the aerodynamics and iron coating was at that time being introduced in military vessels and many other aspects. Verne vision is extremely imaginative - but for different reason that the technology itself, rather its impact and application.


Except when you consider that the submarine was to be under a theorized power from a nuclear source, given the cased door. This was also written before the Curies melted themselves.

Amusing, it's as if he studied the subject and went where nobody else went before about the uses of the material, even before science itself went there. Along the same note, Fallout's designers added something that would have been considered a relatively brand new subject to a 50's author - biological, not just radioactive, warfare.

Gosh.

On a side note, congratulations on noticing the submarine! salute

Again, just because you are an ignorant twatwaffle, it doesn't make me incorrect. Basing your ignorance as a method to prove me wrong is just...well, I have no idea where you're trying to go there.

Quote:

From Earth to Moonjourney to moon with the use of cannon technology another twist on a well known concept.

There is more of course and I'm sure you know exactly what I'm talking about.


Wow, it's like...you're not even trying to do anything but bullshit.

Quote:
(Snip another load of bullshit.)


That still doesn't excuse your pathetic understanding of context. Except, I will address one amusing point:

Quote:
If you had you would have understood that my allusion to post-structuralism was giving merit to your statement, but you failed to grasp that, offering a dismissive and slightly insulting remark(although more sophisticated than your vintage half-wit banter


It isn't "merit" when you're also calling it "gibberish" in the same sentence. Then you go on about "but surely you must be aware that that's only one of the possible interpretations". No, dipshit, there's one, the one the designers stated, the one they put into the fucking game, and the one you keep whining that I'm over-simplifying for you but you need re-validation of it. Then whine because I try to expand a bit given that you're ignorant about that part, maybe you need a bit more of the whole picture.

Pick one or shut the fuck up; do you want to know what the styles are, or do you want to smoke the same brand of crack as the Fallout d20 artists?
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:09 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Quote:
a theorized power from a nuclear source, given the cased door
the way I see it, that would go in the "giving it a twist" department. Guess unlikely to see it could be this way when you've got that burning urge for caustic refutation tard
You're such a mad dog, Rosh icon_chuckel
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Rosh
Desert Strider
Desert Strider


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 812

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:45 am Reply with quoteBack to top

To explain my reasoning behind Jules Verne a bit more, in using a familiar concept as a stepping point, is to note the work of "Paris in the 20th Century". It takes what would have been a familiar concept to his readers, in this case living in Paris, and adding changes and sociological commentaries upon it. It was not modernly placed, but instead had styles and results that he envisioned from his time, and put it in context for his readers.

It really explains my point of:

Quote:
If the piece was mocking of "modern" concepts, usually in a sociological context, then it's usually with a really exotic element with the modern "accepted elements" twisted, and a new reality based upon that.


In this example, the exotic element would be life in the future with the "accepted elements" (items commonly thought to be the norm) of Paris twisted into a cold culture-less wasteland. Did he foresee France's intellectual and cultural revitalization waning at some point? Could it be akin to a 50's author using Art Deco styles, with the styles that he is familiar to as an author be seen in ruin in the future?

Most science fiction does use commonly known elements, because most "heavy" science fiction tends to be where the audience is required to have an imagination.

At the time of his authoring, the concepts of underwater and outer-space travel were quite unheard-of in the public eye. True, they were subjects in discourse and academic studies before Verne wrote about them, but this time finding the earliest source doesn't prove right. Verne was talking about subjects that were up to that point considered a "first light bulb in the Eskimo igloo", for a hopefully sufficient metaphor. While the light bulb did exist elsewhere, the first time it was turned on it made quite an impact. It was something they had never considered except in perhaps crude terms.

So, essentially, Verne went from...a ship voyage (moderately familiar, if at all relevant to undersea travel), to undersea travel with an electrically-powered submarine with a "dangerous power source" about 70 years before it would really happen. In fact, it was his work that really inspired the development of the submarine. Onto space travel...well, it was theorized before, but Verne put it into the public eye. The same with going to the center of the earth, which perhaps had the dinosaurs and a few other common elements, but the rest was not that entertained in science fiction. Sure, we could go on about the Odyssey and those books, but... icon_wink

Back to the real subject, and how SuperH also reminded me upon it - references are in contextual scope. To clarify, using a common leatherhead outfit and cutting off an arm to make it look like Mad Max. That is a decent homage, as Mad Max put the post-apocalyptic genre into the eyes of many. Where it strays from Mad Max is in a number of other ways, namely the art style (aw, shit brought that up again...), the setting elements ("SCIENCE! post-apocalyptic" instead of "bleak post-apocalyptic"), the humor style, and a few other items that are freely available in both the Vault and Fallout to anyone with a brain.

Knowing matters such as this is essential for background information. It would have been one thing if the cover artist and others asked for a bit of background help before they decided to go for a really erroneous reference. Along that, if it came to setting styles and clothing styles, that could have been advised as well.

But I guess Tensen01 felt confident that nearly copying the clothing style from the F:POS box would work, eh? Except an added WTF of that bandanna bullshit.

http://www.mobygames.com/images/covers/large/1094891299-00.jpg
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/42716867/

As envisioned by a 50's science fiction author in the style of EC comics...nope! As a consolation, congrats on correctly rendering the Vault-Tec goggles. The rest is :fugly: wrong.
View user's profileSend private message
Redeye
I lied
I lied


Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 4160
Location: filth

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 8:29 am Reply with quoteBack to top

PiP wrote:
hmm didn't Poseidon powerplant look more or less like this?




Poseidon Fallout


If it ain't oil and it ain't nuke, it's a buncha Green Technocrat hooie!
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:22 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Rosh, there's hardly anything I could disagree with in your last post (tho I've been called a "professional disagreer", and for a reason).

However about the Verne dude, let me tell you how it can be viewed from another perspective. Verne - like other authors - employs the technique which consists in taking elements from different domains and puttingthem together. Let's see how this works with his submarine.

Domain 1 - 'means of transport': (on foot, bicycle, train, boat, etc);

Domain 2 - 'locale': (land, on water, under water, air, outer space, etc; wait there's more! time, sublayers of consciousness, etc). Now you can say 'shut up outer space and sublayers of consciousness hadn't been the locale of travel before Verne' - true that, but they existed. He knew there is something like 'under water' - he just included it in the 'locale' category, because he's not every other dumbfuck.

Same goes with the 'energy source' domain #3; he might put - in this string - elements familiar to him, or those he only hypothesised upon: (coal, oil, gas, sunlight, atomic,).

(side note: I must admit I haven't read Verne icon_redface - except one book as a kid, which I can't remember - so I don't know how much evidence there is for Verne's conceiving nuclear power; the idea of atom has been present in culture since the ancient Greece, but subatomic particles were theorised only a few years after 'Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea' was published, and Sklodowska icon_wink got her Nobel prize about the time Verne kicked the bucket. It appears in this case Verne's idea was truly ingenious)

Anyhow, what I call "giving it a twist" is on the one hand putting (unlikely) elements in certain categories (outer space) and also selecting elements from these domains to make a framework for a (novel).
So he selected 'underwater' (known as such), picked 'boat' - obvious choice for water ('boat' also known as such, but he cleverly made it 'fit' for his locale of choice). Finally, he powered the boat with a reactor (am I right?) or at least hinted at it, in which case he prooves a genious.

But frankly, how many things this innovative he imagined? He mostly made smart configurations of plain elements - like the underwater setting.
Also, how many Vernes are there? Personally, I recommend you this guy (and not beacuse we share ethnic background), who anticipated virtual reality (hey another fancy locale) and many other things. If you want to know which books to pick (as a mature author he despised much of his early work), feel free to ask.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Shamer
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:18 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Haven't visited for few days and already the heated debate gets a tad stale ;D. Let’s put one final spin on it.

First of all I’d like to show exactly why Rosh’s statement is not applicable when considering features of Fallout stylistics:

Rosh said:
Quote:
In context with the Art Deco movement, that is exactly what it was meant to mean. The Art Deco movement, from a couple of decades past, was a cultural revival, a "revitalization through art" of the country. Since the 1930's and before was before the 1950's, and the 1950's was going into more Googie styles, then it would mean that Art Deco was from yesteryear. "In ruin", which you conveniently left out, was also added to give context, because the game is post-apocalyptic. Put in context, it means that the styles of the last couple of decades were put into ruins for art reasons, to fit into the post-apocalyptic universe.


I'm repeating myself again here. I'm familiar with the styles of modernism (predominately with architecture but other spheres of design as well, with exception to textiles and jewellery perhaps). Also, because you've misunderstood, I'm not even questioning the "revitalization through art" aspect of it (with the great recession, and later post war reconstruction as elements of the movement social, economical and historical context). Where do you exactly see me denying that? It is an amusing way of putting it – not because is elaborate but because in the given context it’s loosing its relevance and sound like a half-successful attempt to show ones expertise and knowledge. Hence my initial interest and enquiry. Asking “Sorry what? Is a question about the whole sentence in context. I’m not asking for your further clarification – yes I know I should have pasted the whole fragment I had been questioning – sorry. I realised that it might have not been enough when Atoga picked that up as well to which I clarified that:

Quote:
The sentence in this context strikes me as odd".


Saying that its an odd argument in THE CONTEXT of you explaining why certain styles are used more and other less, (and this is the context of your whole post against which you cast Art Deco in Fallout). Let me illustrate this for you, using your own words (and paraphrasing) and I’ll try to reduce commenting to minimum:


First you say:

Quote:
(the Fallout style) It's also "as envisioned by a 50's science fiction pulp artist, in styles commonly used in EC Comics". People seem to believe that when someone mentions that, it's time to Google for "50's styles". Pffft...how woefully ignorant.


Then you go on to specify to all those ignorant people what's the real stuff (artistic styles used by authors and relation thereof to the contemporaries e.g. Googie and people living in the 50s) is about. By the way your sentence about the Retrodesign - bad composition again - is thrown in media res but is relatively non-obtrusive to your ensuing argument so let's not go there (I’m even tempted to say it holds some water). Returning, in the nutshell you say: artistic styles of the 50s weren't used by the 50's authors because (what you concluded from your knowledge and experience of SF), generally references to popular culture in any given period are rarely used in SF novels from that respective period, because contemporaries who were "into" popular culture wouldn't really be an audience for SF (you used the word "watched" - but lets not go into minutiae details coz that might just add more confusion for you, already suffering from clarity deficiency syndrome).

I gotta tell ya when I first got to this point I thought: Damn! Where are the bloody examples to back it up because its not only a generalization but also a fallacy contradicting majority of my knowledge and analytical research into SF, but at ease I read his posts before, he may conjure up some fairly plausible explanation and examples.

But let’s continue looking at your exact words. Than you immediately say THIS:

Quote:
Then why is Fallout uses a lot of Art Deco; to show the artistic hopes of yesteryear's revitalization through art, in ruin.


So we’ve got all that trend in SF that rather than using contemporary cultural elements uses other – in this particular case past stylistics. That’s your generalization. Fallout, in particular, as any other SF setting is doing the same – according to Rosh the fact that retrofuturistic styles are used in Fallout actually confirms the principle. Why? Now here his argumentation is getting really technical – or should I say convoluted (and I’m no layman)

Rosh thinks that his argument holds coz Fallout as a post-apocaliptic game (created in the 90’s and make no mistake it’s very important) is delivered in a form and idiom imitating the style of 50’s SF (for Rosh it’s enough, to accept that it must be then identical to 50’s products stylistics in every respect) uses past artistic references to show – also for artistic reasons – “yesteryear’s" styles (art deco in relation to the 50s) in ruin (due to the apocalypse) – it does that because (again as a typical SF product) the use of contemporary styles would not fit the 50s idiom. After all, Fallout is an artistic rendition of (interactive) EC comic (to use Rosh’s oft repeated – probably after designers – product reference)..Interesting.

That’s (minus my commentary) is exactly what you said and I quoted at the head of this post.

One can even make an effort and say it’s a valid observation. But it fails for one fundamental reason which should be taken for granted by any one who has a critical (meaning analytical) mind and I think the majority the participants of this forum have otherwise they wouldn’t offer their opinions. The reason is that FALLOUT IS ONLY STYLED AFTER THE 50’S SF PRODUCTS IT IS NOT THE REAL 50’S PRODUCT. It’s a computer game medium (which adds another layer but I won’t even go there, too obvious) non existent then, but more importantly, I repeat, it was designed in the 90’s, by people who didn’t live in the 50s. Now even if we accept that they went to great lengths to imitate the 50’s stylistic idiom and themes (which I believe they did and probably stated that themselves – great chaps as they are), they couldn’t discard their contemporary consciousness (of ppl living in the 90s) and put themselves completely into 50’s paradigm – it’s impossible even if you suffered complete amnesia (or brain wipe) you wouldn’t have complete reference and consciousness (even in single aspect) of the period which you didn’t live in (experienced) first hand (not just through research which by default is never complete) and time travel if existed wouldn’t help either. Even if we remain only on the level of style/art it’s impossible. Even Leo Boyarsky – kudos to him wouldn’t be able to do it. It’s beyond the capacity of human brain. It’s even “clearly obvious from playing the fucking game.” If you actually try to analyse the stylistics yourself – (which you involuntarily do anyway, interacting with it or rather your brain does)

If anyone has any doubts try it yourself – put yourself in the “mode” of any period which you didn’t live through like 50s for instance – even if you think you can shield off any references from different periods and relay on only ORIGINAL material you will fail coz even that original information is being filtered through your CURRENT intellect (knowledge, viewpoint, experience, emotions, culture and all that). Sorry to say that but it will only be an approximation, or adaptation of the said stylistics.

By the way, my argumentation and analysis presented here in somewhat simplified way (believe me this is heavy shit and I’ve already touched upon ontology, epistemology and transcendentalism – all important for text/discourse/medium analysis in my former post) is not some sort of an acid trip, most of the principles behind it are highly influenced by a body of cultural sciences, and techniques of discourse analysis – I don’t feel its necessary to give any sources here. My old buddy PiP who is on exactly the same page as I’m will confirm it. (You’re having a fucking ball don’t you mate ;D shit I can’t believe I’m doing this shit here. What a fucking comedy! ;D )

Alright (regaining composure)

More from Rosh
Quote:
Is that clear enough for you now? Or did you suddenly forget that we were talking about Art Deco, just like you forgot that you wanted to know what the designers of the game said


Oh it’s clear for me, just as your own reasoning seems to be clear for you. As far as this matter is concerned, my aim is to provide enough arguments to demonstrate (not necessarily to you) that your reasoning is somewhat insubstantial.

You assume that I lack reference and background knowledge. Only on the basis of me questioning YOUR statement – OPINION, formed by you using your own brain about the reasons for using art deco in the game and further your so cold expertise of SF as a genre. Am I questioning the fact that Fallout draws from Art Deco, retro futurism, googie, modernism etc? No. Rosh I’m questioning your generalization and your evaluation.

I doubt that the designers of the game were ever consciously exploring the aspect of "yesteryear’s revitalization through art (if you insist on using one aspect of the movement as the denominator for the whole), in ruin" by their use of the said stylistics. Yes, it is a feature of many modernist styles (i.e. art deco or art noveu) no doubt about it. But in the context of Fallout the revitalization aspect is imported only as a side-effect of featuring that sort of stylistics.

Quote:
I am sorry I don't dice it into layman's terms for you to begin with, but you're the one who wanted to butt into the conversation, it's your obligation to educate yourself a bit.


But you have diced into layman’s terms. There is nothing elaborate about your original statements – I said it many times I wasn’t questioning the concepts but the way you’ve put them together. Oh and, I’m sorry for butting in and questioning your flow of thoughts – you were stating them openly on the forum and thus is open for debate so even if you were the lead designer of the game I could have been questioning your arguments (you do it yourself all the time)

Quote:
Three-part sentences of items listed in context, or three items to be reflected upon in the same train of thought. Yet we seem to be aware that you're failing at context.


Show me where. Can you even analyse my statements, identify the ideologies I'm drawing from (PiP provided a visual hint to one framework), let alone understand my reasoning? No you dismiss it instead.

Quote:
Shall I shut up about that as well, or do you want me to not put things in context for you, and then you gripe at me putting them in context, and then now you're complaining because I have to explain myself at a depth you're unfamiliar with?


They were fairly simple from the start, too simple in fact - by that I mean superficial. Your further explanation was even more crude - hence I have accused you of being simplistic - suspecting that you could do better, but you disappointed me.

Quote:
(More pseudo-intellectual bullshit.)
Except that I can point out that in context with the designer's plans, as I now remind you for about the third time. I can also note that every Fallout game is pretty much the same. So, given those two facts, it is my obligation to educate you upon matters you seem to have little familiarity with, and then you decide to presume it's my fault for your ignorance or failure to read in context?


You could point it out but why should I take your word for it. Your analytical skills are somewhat primitive.

Let me get this straight, so you know the "designer's plans". All designers involved in fact. You had known their intentions, and witnessed the initial stages of the project, you've seen story boards, concept art, everything. Then you accessed their thoughts, references, all the concepts they were drawing from., in fact you were there, with them, present in all their heads at once, throughout the whole production process and afterwards when they were adding new elements of setting responding to fans' setting-related questions and such. ;D

But seriously, even if you knew all the published material by heart, and were able to quote any reference available, how can you be sure that you can analyse and interpret all that completely, reaching an absolute (always true) meaning?


Taking even such small part of the whole design as the use of at deco - do you even realise how much concepts, historical background, intertextuality and connotations are involved here? - you cannot justify your being selective by saying it's a context of a computer game, and even if you do what makes you think that, even within this small sphere, you know it all? Especially as you probably never used any formal analytical methods (not consciously anyway). Are you familiar with such approaches as deconstructivism, or structuralism? Let me guess. You are not. But you still claim to be an authority on the subject going even as far as forcing your views on the others claiming they their knowledge is insufficient. Confirmation in your own words:

I say many interpretations (and I was talking about your analysis of the whole SF not only Fallout but once again you didn't understand the question - and you accuse me of not reading in context) and you say:
Quote:
No, dipshit, there's one , the one the designers stated, the one they put into the fucking game,


Quote:
I try to expand a bit given that you're ignorant about that part, maybe you need a bit more of the whole picture.


So the designers not only stated how to interpret stylistics of the game they also placed the right interpretation in the game. But doesn't interpretation rest with the receiver, not the designer? Does it mean that if I interpret the game stylistics differently (using different approach but justifying it with factual and relevant examples), I'm still incorrect? Is it true with any interpretation of art and style? Is all experience of artistic culture so predetermined for us? Are we prisoners of determinism and designers' plans? Or maybe Fallout is a special case with one and only true interpretation (the whole picture you are talking about)

What do you think people?

Now as far as the SF debate is concerned, It’s, as expected, become academic.

Let me recreate your “event list” here coz it's getting a bit silly:

i) First you say that SF authors in the 50's often take familiar elements and gives them a "twist"
ii) I say that all SF is like that - (remember that I've also said that my concepts of SF and popular culture are probably different than yours)
iii) To that you say that:
Quote:
Not entirely, some is about pure speculation of wholly unheard-of things.
(throwing Verne at my arse)
iv) I reply that it's pretty much the same - (giving few examples) - author uses familiar concepts to manipulate (or twist or whatever) to reach new unheard-of ideas. And those source concepts can only either predate or be contemporary to the author (they don't come from the future)
v) Afterwards you add that I'm wrong if one takes into consideration the knowledge of common man of a given period because the new ideas were so innovative (I don’t think its as important as you believe, in fact, even if you taken primitive knowledge I could still back up my approach – using very broad aspect of familiarity)
vi) Then you admit that Verne for instance didn't write about unheard-of things but was using familiar ones as springboard to develop something new but the new concept were so innovative that might have been considered (earlier) unknown

Now at this point I have to say that you are actually going along very similar track to mine the difference is very superficial. For example, following your absolutely irrelevant reference to science (it’s not introducing anything new to the issue at hand and could easily spark off a new dabate) You move on (or rather get back) to EC Comics claiming that they use the same method – yeah fine but does that contradict me in any way? Frankly, no.

Quote:
So...where did the idea of radioactivity causing giant mutations come from? Oh, I know! It must have been Alice in Fucking Wonderland, from the same shroom you're on


Again, here as well speculation on unheard-of concepts can be understood as familiar concepts undergoing a "twist"

That concept originated from the known fact that radiation affects mutation. It was known earlier. Where from? Oh I don’t know maybe from the fact that the guy who discovered that radiation can increase mutation of fruit flies (in 1926) and then won Nobel Prize in 1946.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/muller.html

And the GIANT (or any aberrant) result of mutation is the so cold "twist" of yours. Probably used in EC comics and dime pulp fiction to tap into widespread fear of this new freshly harnessed atomic power and it’s dangers, along with the onset of the arms race and all other events. Why? For the sake of sensationalism among others, and appealing to the same sentiment of our psyche that gave birth to werewolves, vampires and other embodiments of fearsome things, and forces. Dangerous radiation and mutation are very abstract things but become more accessible if animated as horribly mutated inhuman beings – that’s obvious (although the theory of Folk Psychology is still considered controversial)
The fact that the end result is improbable and clearly fictional doesn't mean that my claim is invalid.

We're going in circles here, and this discussion could go on indefinitely.

Quote:
Along the same note, Fallout's designers added something that would have been considered a relatively brand new subject to a 50's author - biological, not just radioactive, warfare.


Yeah, but for the fact that Fallout designers weren’t living in the 50s much later when existence of biological warfare and all sorts of mutagens was (unfortunately) more than certain.

Quote:
On a side note, congratulations on noticing the submarine! Salute


On the side note, no I haven't missed the submarine. You have.

Evidence:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/theymadeamerica/whomade/fulton_lo.html
(his achievements brought him celebrity status - hence he was fairly popular and heard of)
and
http://www.robertfulton.org/
(Trivia: What name he's given to his submarine? No fuckin way!!!!!!! Nautilus - but how he possibly could if he preceded Verne by what 70 odd years??? (Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (Vingt mille lieues sous les mers, 1870)) - this must be for you an evidence of time travel.)
and yet another one to awe you:
http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/fulton.html - a website endorsed by MIT go fucking challenge that source

But it's getting better
Plain google search brings the following:
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blsubmarine4.htm (16th fucking century - documented)
somtin more substantial? Here ya go:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostsub/history.html (with a neat timeline for you, Verne included)

Anyone, virtually anyone at least a bit versed in marine history can tell you that, but probably question now why I have used iron-cast bell example instead. Two reasons:

This information is so readily available - especially online - that you would hit the jackpot immediately, as I said before it was to be an intellectual exercise for you (difficulty level, appropriate) and/or I wanted another forum member to throw that in your face, hence even further undermining your so called knowledge of SF (no one did but no matter, they know anyway icon_wink )

Diving bell is a contraption was used first time for deep diving (if limited) not just submersion. Hereby illustrating alternative scientific inspiration for Verne's unheard-of invention, oh and it’s an older idea as well.

Finally to sum up, the case of Verne's Nautilus propulsion, ideally I would send you back to the book. But if you need some quick remedy for your catatonic state of knowledge, here's some simplified meterial:
http://home.att.net/~karen.crisafulli/nautilus.html

Oh and the propulsion dilemma – here is an alternative view (albeit based on quotations)
Now as far as I remember the propulsion was referred to as electrical – which you confirm. The element of danger? Well electricity is quite dangerous in itself but there is another thing; Verne hinted at the source of that energy as well – chemical reaction. Yes the chamber was sealed but it’s easy to guess, looking from Verne point of view even, that chemical reaction (or set of reactions) producing energy of that magnitude could probably be quite dangerous (toxic fumes, acidity, unstable substances). Yeah it’s quite similar to nuclear power from certain perspective but he is not that vague.
Still another aspect is the source of electrical current: chemical vs thermonuclear (coz this is used in modern subs I believe). Now I’m not a specialist so correct me if I’m wrong but, the first produces electricity in a way directly (like a battery), whereas thermonuclear uses (funnily enough) modernised principle of a steam engine – nuclear fission produces enormous amounts of heat (among other radiations) which is used to convert water into steam and engage dynamo-like mechanism which in turn produces electricity. So, similar but different – crazy stuff.

With the view of the above references some of that:

Quote:
So, essentially, Verne went from...a ship voyage (moderately familiar, if at all relevant to undersea travel), to undersea travel with an electrically-powered submarine with a "dangerous power source" about 70 years before it would really happen. In fact, it was his work that really inspired the development of the submarine. Onto space travel...well, it was theorized before, but Verne put it into the public eye. The same with going to the center of the earth, which perhaps had the dinosaurs and a few other common elements, but the rest was not that entertained in science fiction. Sure, we could go on about the Odyssey and those books, but...


Is sort of, I don’t know, highly debatable.

Quote:
Most science fiction does use commonly known elements, because most "heavy" science fiction tends to be where the audience is required to have an imagination.


Just look at this sentence! Look at it! What you even trying to achieve with it I don’t know. I’ve shown the sentence (in context) to a few of my English friends and they agree with me – it’s outlandish.

Quote:
At the time of his authoring, the concepts of underwater and outer-space travel were quite unheard-of in the public eye. True, they were subjects in discourse and academic studies before Verne wrote about them, but this time finding the earliest source doesn't prove right.


Doesn't prove wrong either.

Quote:
Verne was talking about subjects that were up to that point considered a "first light bulb in the Eskimo igloo", for a hopefully sufficient metaphor. While the light bulb did exist elsewhere, the first time it was turned on it made quite an impact. It was something they had never considered except in perhaps crude terms.


Perhaps. That's one way of looking at it I suppose. Still considering historical data, and the fact that 19th century was a period of rampaging industrialism, technological development (take Charles Babbage for instance) and scientific discoveries, I will be more inclined to say that he was a visionary but not extraordinarily inventive. Nonetheless his works are superb.

Anyway, the discussion becomes a bit pointless. The bottom line is that any SF work, in fact any new conceptualization can be said to have been a result of interplay between familiar concepts, or rather domains (networked clusters of concepts). I could even go to the very basic meta-conceptual level here but that would take a LOT more space. PiP illustrated the whole thing with his usual “to the point” brevity, as he always does (;D) whereas I like to fuck around with words and meanings, so use his contribution as further illustration of cognitive approach to conceptualization.

By the way PiP, read some fiction instead of playing the bloody games all the time ;D

As the final point:

Quote:
Back to the real subject, and how SuperH also reminded me upon it - references are in contextual scope. To clarify, using a common leatherhead outfit and cutting off an arm to make it look like Mad Max. That is a decent homage, as Mad Max put the post-apocalyptic genre into the eyes of many. Where it strays from Mad Max is in a number of other ways, namely the art style (aw, shit brought that up again...), the setting elements ("SCIENCE! post-apocalyptic" instead of "bleak post-apocalyptic"), the humor style, and a few other items that are freely available..


Alternatively one may say that fallout is a hybrid of artistic styles (drawing from pulp SF, and very much the contemporary SF as well), where stylistic bastardisation (not a pejorative term, it means adaptation) of pulp SF stylistics seems to be the most prevalent but not exclusive. So if Tensen made one of his characters look like taken from Mad Max that would be acceptable in my view. I agree that however that the 90’s reference is a bit too far though.

That's it kids from now on no lectures (I hope ;D). No go and scavenge some pre-apocalyptic spam!
View user's profileSend private message
Rosh
Desert Strider
Desert Strider


Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 812

PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:27 am Reply with quoteBack to top

As much as I'd like to tear apart your chronological proof of "See! This guy did it FIRST!", I can diffuse both yours and PiP's arguments almost entirely with simply two reminders.

I mentioned the differing point of Verne's fiction, in context to a specific point. That he took a previously unheard of element in his writing (that would be science fiction) and brought it to the public. THAT is what is important, not your little data mining escapade. When discussing styles of fiction, you have to be mindful of when and how the material is presented, and Verne was the one who touched many subjects with creativity - and put it out to the common imagination. These items were formerly NOT subjects of the common imagination or other fiction writers - many were on sea travel. He used several elements that were not in the public mind at that time and went off the deep end with them (pardon the pun), and some subjects were from a familiar element and given a twist (like the book with Paris...given that he was FRENCH and his audience was in PARIS, perhaps his editor was right in saying it was too dark for his readership, a bit too close to home?)

I'm not stating these examples for my benefit, no matter how much you might want to argue about miniscule incorrectness.

Despite your wordy attempts, I can simply point out that I am merely clarifying myself, and you're simply going off on useless time-wasting spree. Would you care to stick within context, or keep on going with more pedantic waffling?

As for the attempts to say that perhaps my understanding of what the designers told me could be flawed...nice try, but when when the point is nearly verbatim, I can't seriously entertain your denial. The "guns akimbo being part of 50's science fiction styles" argument is in the news forum.

Back on discussion, you make a reather self-defeating statement.

Quote:
Alternatively one may say that fallout is a hybrid of artistic styles (drawing from pulp SF, and very much the contemporary SF as well), where stylistic bastardisation (not a pejorative term, it means adaptation) of pulp SF stylistics seems to be the most prevalent but not exclusive. So if Tensen made one of his characters look like taken from Mad Max that would be acceptable in my view.


If it's a hybrid of styles...then why the fuck would something be styled entirely upon Mad Max's style? Did you suddenly wake up with an amazing thesaurus-like ability to pull words from your ass...and then forget exactly what the hell they mean? The word I'm talking about is "hybrid", and if the core styling is based upon EC Comics, then that means that other elements would be styled to match that one in context. Which they are, as are fictionalized elements of contemporary 50's ideas included, with examples like the leatherheads in Junktown. The Mad Max references, commonly the jacket design, also fits within that image. But apart from that, Fallout has little to do with Mad Max. Really, do you see people driving and fighting on vehicles in Fallout? Wonder why? Because it doesn't fit the elements of the universe in proper context.

Thank you for using the same idiotic argument used to excuse the movie poster of a cover, except you were stupid enough to use it AFTER it was shot down the first time. Laughing REALLY FUCKING HARD

Quote:
I agree that however that the 90’s reference is a bit too far though.


Oh, but they made some reference to SkyNet in Fallout 2, so if something looks a bit Terminator, it fits!

Your "logic", dumbass. :ROFL:
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:22 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Rosh wrote:
Verne was the one who touched many subjects with creativity - and put it out to the common imagination.
oh Rosh, but that dissolves neither mine nor shamer's point. Do you see? icon_eyebrow
Quote:
you're simply going off on useless time-wasting spree. Would you care to stick within context, or keep on going with more pedantic waffling?
You hadn't thought someone would outdo you in this, had you? icon_chuckel
Quote:
As for the attempts to say that perhaps my understanding of what the designers told me could be flawed...nice try, but when when the point is nearly verbatim, I can't seriously entertain your denial.
I'm sorry (I am), but you've missed the point. It's about the nature of cognition and it's really very basic.
Quote:
If it's a hybrid of styles...then why the fuck would something be styled entirely upon Mad Max's style? Did you suddenly wake up with an amazing thesaurus-like ability to pull words from your ass...and then forget exactly what the hell they mean? The word I'm talking about is "hybrid", and if the core styling is based upon EC Comics, then that means that other elements would be styled to match that one in context. Which they are, as are fictionalized elements of contemporary 50's ideas included, with examples like the leatherheads in Junktown. The Mad Max references, commonly the jacket design, also fits within that image. But apart from that, Fallout has little to do with Mad Max. Really, do you see people driving and fighting on vehicles in Fallout? Wonder why? Because it doesn't fit the elements of the universe in proper context.
so... including "mad-max-jacket-wearing leatherheads" fits but including "one of characters looking like taken from Mad Max" doesnt fit? And "hybrid" is taking one style and "other elements would be styled to match that one in context"? What's 'hybrid' about it? I thought a 'hybrid' style (or whatever kind of 'hybrid') would derive from at least two different sources icon_confused2. Like EC comics and mad-max leather jacket - like you rightly pointed out. I think you want to say that making a character more mad-max-like than those in Fallout is no longer Fallout style, and I utterly agree - and I'm sure shamer does, too. The difference is that shamer apparently thinks it is still acceptable in some cases while you don't. Gee now that's a biggie icon_chuckel
Quote:
Oh, but they made some reference to SkyNet in Fallout 2, so if something looks a bit Terminator, it fits!

Your "logic", dumbass. :ROFL:
this isn't really shamer's logic applied now is it.
Regaining self-assurance as writing this last post, were you? Back to calling names? See, that's what I love you for, chap: you're the best when it comes to molesting the devs of flawed Fallout spin-offs icon_hug
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
atoga
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member


Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 5421
Location: Coney Island

PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:05 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

The Polish Cunt wrote:
It's about the nature of cognition and it's really very basic.

L,O,L.
View user's profileSend private message
PiP
Last, Best Hope of Humanity
Last, Best Hope of Humanity


Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 5025
Location: Brighton beach

PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:32 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

icon_dance
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic


Jump to:  



View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group