Tag: Rant

Cheers!

On this episode, the guys take some time to break down their thoughts on Avengers: Age of Ultron and their review may surprise you a bit. Also, they take some time at the beginning to talk about Burns’ hatred for panhandlers and over-the-top Veteran reunions (he hopes it doesn’t make him a terrible person, but it just may).

Burns also walks through two other movies he saw during his mini-movie marathon weekend in Ex Machina and It Follows. The fellas also break down the new red-band Vacation reboot trailer, excitement for Tomorrowland and Mad Max: Fury Road, and Brent talks about what the next big thing in movie theater view will be – HDR.

But, most importantly, Burns tries out the new Coors Light Citrus Radler, their summer seasonal. This one may be a game changer (or it is just another light beer). All of this and they drink and drink some more, so clink ’em and drink ’em and hopefully you enjoy (or at least tolerate) the 21st Birthday of Long Distance Drinking!

(more…)

Hey There Fellow Drinkers! It is time again for another batch of some Long Distance Drinking!

On this episode, through Leonard Nimoy’s death, we end up discussing and re-living the great career of Michael Clarke Duncan more than that of Mr. Nemo’s (as Lance keeps accidentally saying).

Aside from that, we stick with the “Hollywood” theme by discussing The Oscar Nominated movies for Best Picture, Hot Topless Maids and Brently’s proclivity for putting dicks in his mouth. We also delve into the process of paying respect to a TV show or movie by creating a fan-film that is different in style but still plays up the fan-service.

We also give an update to our Long Distance Dynasty on NCAA Football 2014 – here’s a spoiler, the three of us suck at it – and to Burns’ dismay, we avoid playing What’s in My Mouth again…

(more…)

First off, apologies on the sound being a tad quiet at parts and over-loud at other parts. It apparently wasn’t a great idea for Burns to be blitzed when mic testing. Or for an entire podcast, which he was.

On this episode, Burns cannot hide his exuberance at the Gophers beating the Wolverines and winning the Little Brown Jug and explains why it’s important. The guys then tackle the tough topics of the day like the Fappening and Adrian Peterson. Then we introduce a couple of new segments – Challenge the Akinator and Fan Fiction Fuckery.

But, the whole episode falls apart once the gang debates the greatness (or lack therof) of the O.C., which causes Drunk Burns to completely lose his mind. Is it just the alcohol talking or is Burns really that insane? Find out on this edition of Long Distance Drinking!
(more…)

It’s time again to get your drink on!

We’re back with one of our longer drinking sessions. This time we discuss how Michael Bay is raping our childhoods – and specifically how Lance keeps falling for it. We try to prognosticate where he will strike next and then decide to cast a new He-Man movie, but don’t get very far.

And also, Lance describes how the antiquated methods of measuring drinks, especially scotch, need to be revised. He looks to the cutting-edge system of equine measurement for inspiration.

Drinking rules are as follows:

  • Chug through the entire theme song along with Burns, if you’re cool like him.
  • Whenever you hear a conversation killer sound effect, take a drink.
  • Take a drink each time we say spoiler.
  • Take two drinks for each Michael Bay movie you’ve seen that Lance mentions, because you are part of the problem.
  • If we say something that crosses the line to you (sexist or what have you), take a drink as it will make it better!
  • If you are ever confused about the rules, just take a couple drinks and move on!

(more…)

Yesterday was the launch of the most recent installment of the Call of Duty franchise, Call of Duty: Ghosts.   And you know what, I could give two shits about it.

I am certain that millions of ardent fans got in line outside of Gamestops and Best Buys everywhere at  around 10:00 Monday night to be among the first to pick up their copies of the game at midnight for their Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 consoles. Millions more will purchase it the day they pick up their next generation console of choice later this month, either the Xbox One or PlayStation 4.

Well, count me out. CoD is not for me anymore.

This hasn’t always been the case. A few installments ago, I was amongst the eager crowd at the midnight launch, waiting with excitement at the opportunity to pick up Modern Warfare 2 so that I could get my fix.

So what has changed? Well, it certainly hasn’t been the Call of Duty franchise.

One main issue I have with the series is that as time has gone on, for the most part, it hasn’t advanced. The past few iterations I have played (Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops 1 2) have made very minor changes over the years. 

The high point in the series in my opinion is still the first Call of Duty: Black Ops. The single-player campaign was one of the more entertaining entries in the series, even with some of the story being impossible to comprehend.

More importantly, this game featured developer Treyarch’s best iteration of the online cooperative multiplayer mode, Zombies. My friends and I invested hundreds of hours into perfecting strategy on all of the maps that came with the game as well as the downloadable additions.

Since then, the series has stagnated. Granted, they have changed the leveling dynamic of the multiplayer modes to try to give the series new legs and keep it fresh. Unfortunately for the two development teams, Infinity Ward (the Modern Warfare series and Ghosts) and Treyarch, the main reason I dislike the game is out of their control.

The biggest problem is that the multiplayer mode isn’t fun anymore. At all. And no matter how many changes the developers make, it cannot be fixed.

The limitations are in two places. That first limitation is me.

Living in The Real World (TRW as Mr. Beisel, our Civics and Economics teacher in high school, would say) makes it nearly impossible for me to succeed in the game.

This realization came to me while playing my favorite entry in the series, Black Ops. When I first bought the game at launch and jumped into multiplayer match-ups, I was able to compete because everyone else was at square one too. I could actually kill people in Team Deathmatch and was able to run circles around people in Capture the Flag.

But, as always happens, life got in the way and I couldn’t play much for about a month. And when I came back, it was a completely different game.

While I was still learning or remembering the maps, others had found the perfect strategies and were exploiting them with precision. And I could not do anything without dying in quick succession when facing people that have prestiged (maxed out their experience level progress) multiple times only a month after launch.

At that point, no matter how much I would try, a good rage quit would get in the way of me learning enough to be competitive. And it just wasn’t fun anymore. No matter what I would try, I could not break out of that. And I am sure I am not the only one that feels that way, am I right?

The second limitation is everyone else playing the game.

They are just too damn good. And unless they are in your clan, they don’t care about you. Even in team games, they don’t do anything but try to score as much as they can individually. Granted, this can help the team win, but working out strategies with the rest of the team makes the game more enjoyable for everyone and helps people improve.

But that would require you being able to talk to the other players. And unfortunately (at least on PS3), only three types of people talk over the game on microphones: Douchebags that scream at everyone else for sucking so bad, twelve year-olds regurgitating the filthiest trash talk they can remember, and people listening to music at a level that makes it impossible to understand. Sometimes it is a combination of all three!

And these are just the people on your team. The people on the other team will at least consist of one person (usually more) that will exploit every single thing they can to their advantage to get a win, which usually means sniping your spawn points to get easy kills. Granted, they are just using what the developers have given them to win the game. But it creates an annoying experience for the uninitiated or those struggling to learn.

I became so frustrated and bored with Black Ops, which was my favorite of all of them, that I didn’t even buy the next installment, Modern Warfare 3.

I gave the developers a second chance when Black Ops 2 came around. I was hoping that Treyarch would build off of the enjoyable single player campaign of the first, breathe new life into zombie mode, and level out the frustration of the multiplayer mode.

Unfortunately, that game was a step back in all respects. I never even finished the single player mode because it was just plain boring. The “Pick 10” system did make multiplayer a bit more interesting, but I still suffered to be competitive when I purchased the game a couple of months after launch.

The biggest travesty and last straw was Zombie mode. While “Tranzit” was an interesting idea and made for some fun games, the rest of the zombie maps that came on the disk were plain and uninspired. Kill waves of zombies on a farm. You can’t interact with anything on the farm and there aren’t any new areas you can open up (unlike previous iterations), just find a spot, sit there, and try to survive.

Don’t like that? Do the same thing in a town square. Or a street. Don’t like that? Pay $15 to buy something you might like more. As if surviving waves of zombies wasn’t tough enough, surviving the boredom added to the difficulty.

At that point, I decided I was done with Call of Duty. Maybe not permanently, but for a long time. I would rather spend the $60 on a game that will have a much more developed story and more diverse gaming experiences. Or split that amount to buy a couple PlayStation Network games to get more bang for my buck.

From what I have read in reviews, Ghosts is one of the better Call of Duty games and is starting to take the series in a better direction, so maybe it isn’t fair to take it all out on this new version.

But, if Activision (or any other publisher) is going to annualize a series, they risk not evolving enough to keep the casual fan interested in the series. Sports games and Assassin’s Creed have struggled with this as well and more games will in the future too. For me, I’ll spend my money on games that take the development time to make improvements and changes to their games. Like Grand Theft Auto V.

What are your thoughts? Do you agree with me? Or am I just a stupid noob? Let us know in the comments below. I’ll just be waiting patiently for my PS4.

The Netflix rating system SUCKS!

What qualifies me to say that? I watch a lot of Netflix Streaming and I rate most everything I watch.  I like rating movies. I like the feeling of giving credit to good movies and shaming the bad ones. But the Netflix rating system sucks, because five stars just isn’t enough to judge anything properly.  Their “Hated It”, “Didn’t Like It”, “Liked It”, “Really Like It”, and “Loved It” rating system just doesn’t leave any room for really great movies or really terrible movies.

I end up giving 80% of movies three stars because they were just “meh” to me.  And then I am forced to put movies like Planet Terror and Land of the Dead in the same five-star category as V for Vendetta and Dr. Strangelove, when there is at least a star in between them.  But I can’t drop Planet Terror and Land of the Dead down to the four-star level with movies such as Payback and Get Shorty.

Then, the movies that I rated as “Hated It”, like The Mist and The Day After Tomorrow, get lumped into one-star ratings with movies that should be rated lower because they gave me cancer and kicked my dead dog, like 2 Fast 2 Furious and Timeline (because Paul Walker sucks).

This got me thinking about other rating systems that are out there.  There’s the “X” out of 10 rating system (solve for X), but that is just too many numbers.  When I see this rating system used I don’t give a shit about numbers 4-7, 9-10 might as well be the same number, and 1-3 must just be terrible.  And then, I just don’t know what to do with 8; it feels like getting a 15 in black jack (not sure if you want to hit or not).

Then there is Siskel & Ebert’s famous “thumbs” rating system that is for the dumbest of people who have no cognitive function, they just like shiny lights and loud sounds ( and anything by Michael Bay)… Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down, FUCK YOU!

And this problem isn’t just for movies.  It also goes for TV shows, books, music, and whatever else you can or want to rate.  So that is my dilemma – there has to be a better rating system.

I have been pondering this a lot and I have an idea for something better.  It isn’t perfect, but I believe it is an improvement.  It is a seven star rating system.

With the Seven Star Rating SystemTM, One Star represents the worst movies ever made.  These are movies so bad that you wish nothing but terrible, terrible things on whoever (whomever?) was responsible – like for the rest of their lives, whenever they take a step it is always on a Lego.

Then you have a middle ground, Four Stars: the rating you give movies when you can’t quite decide if they are good or not.  Finally, you have a Seventh Star you can reserve for what you watch, listen to, or read that make you feel things and say “Wow! That. Was. Amazing!”  Also, the Seven Star Rating SystemTM eliminates the confusion about what the fuck to do with the “8”.

Seven Star Rating SystemTM would be this:

  • One Star: Atrocious.  These movies are so bad that you are pissed you wasted money and time on it.  It’s like eating a soggy biscuit from all the demons of all the circles of hell.
  • Two Stars: Terrible.  There are very few things you liked about these movies, they are mostly awful.
  • Three Stars: Bad. The things that you didn’t like outweigh the things you like by slim margin.
  • Four Stars: Meh. The movies you haven’t really decided if you liked them or not. There were good and bad points and more often than not it needs rewatching to determine your opinion.
  • Five Stars: Good.  The things that you like outweigh the things you don’t. They are enjoyable and often include guilty pleasure movies.
  • Six Stars: Great. These movies get almost everything right.  What flaws there are do not detract from the overall enjoyment of the show.
  • Seven Stars: Incredible. This is reserved for the best of the best.  These movies made a real impact on you and you will never forget them.  It’s like a velvet hammer from God himself.

Now, I know this still has holes in it because it only gives a very general view of whatever you are reviewing, but we are working on something to help make the review system mean more to you.  So until the entire “Greatest” Rating System is ready, we will be using the Seven Star Rating SystemTM.

So what do you think of Seven Star Rating SystemTM?  Does it make sense or is it total crap?  Let us know what you think in the comments.  Also comment on your One star and Seven star picks for movies, TV show, music and/or books.

P.S. God damn Siskel & Ebert’s Thumbs. Two thumbs so far down, they’re six feet under. (Too soon?)