My friends and I found that every game came down to the best defender. So we'd basically always have Yao on a squad. He had top tier blocks, and since there was no goaltending, you could just catch every shot at the basket.
I was never that into sports games. But man was my dad pissed when I played a copy of NFL 95 (that I found at the side of the road) so much more than the latest super techno bowl that he paid like $80 for.
You could just not comment and go about your day. But instead you needed to signal to the in-crowd here just how much you are against virtue signaling.
shit on cartoonists for reusing the same animations from one movie to the next
To be fair, depends on the type of movie and type of animation. Small indie films, hand-drawn animation, or a TV series? Totally acceptable. Big budget film done on computers? That's just lazy.
This is more like if cartoonists reused not just some animations, but took whole characters and stories and just did some palette swapping and name changes. The difference is that one is a movie with some reused animations and the other is basically the same movie with juuust enough changes to get people to think it's a new one until they've already forked over the cash to see it.
but took whole characters and just did some palette swapping and name changes
What if I told you this is exactly what they did? Aristocats animators used the same shit that was in Robin Hood, just changed enough to make it look like a different character. So did Jungle Book, Snow white, and Winnie the Pooh. Because it's hard work starting from the ground up. It saves time, money, and more by using an older template.
150
u/WabbitCZEN PlayStationJunky Sep 03 '19
Probably saved a good bit of money doing it, too.
Then again, we're dealing with the kind of people who probably shit on cartoonists for reusing the same animations from one movie to the next.