Anyone watch TMNT 2012 on Nickelodeon? It's the best action cartoon that channel ever had, and I'll argue it's the best incarnation of TMNT yet.
Posted by Lord Crump Jun 22 2013 16:51 GMT in Lord Crump
- Like?

Replies:

holy shit you aren't dead yet
Reply by Super-Claus Jun 22 2013 16:55 GMT
I actually haven't had a chance to see it yet (no access to Nickelodeon). I thought the 2003 reboot was pretty good, so it's great to hear this one is even better.
Reply by Francis Jun 22 2013 17:14 GMT
I've only seen a little bit, it looked good from what I saw. I don't watch TV though, I live in 2013.
Reply by Fortran Jun 22 2013 20:50 GMT
" I don't watch TV though, I live in 2013."
that is the most retarded thing I ever read, you should feel bad
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 22 2013 21:02 GMT
Caveman Crump is upset nobody uses obsolete technology anymore
Reply by Fortran Jun 22 2013 21:35 GMT
tv shows are an art form that are conveyed through technology
you can watch TMNT 2012 on your computer, you don't have to use a television
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 22 2013 21:58 GMT
Shows are good, TV itself is obsolete.
Reply by Fortran Jun 22 2013 22:31 GMT

I think most people these days either use Netflix or watch them somewhere online. Well, maybe not old people. But I think with the abundance of special services like Netflix and internet access it just makes using an actual television for watching television shows kind of unnecessarily complicated.

Reply by hero of time Jun 22 2013 22:43 GMT

How is sitting on a couch, pressing a button and looking at a screen complicated? I still prefer the old idiot box over downloading stuff

Reply by Doopliss Jun 22 2013 22:56 GMT
Televisions are wondeful for multi-tasking; I'm sitting on my couch with my laptop, programming my indie game with the television on in the background right now
living the life of a king
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 22 2013 23:19 GMT
TV is awful because you can't control what happens, in addition it's censored to hell. Why not just get another monitor, crump?
Reply by Fortran Jun 23 2013 00:37 GMT

I'm with doops on this one. Then again I only really watch Conan and whatevers on AMC.

Reply by Super-Claus Jun 23 2013 00:56 GMT
they usually don't make 52 inch monitors, fortran
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 23 2013 00:58 GMT
52 inches seems really unnecessary to me. And, like Fortran said, you can't control what happens. You don't really choose what you watch. It may be seperated into channels but its on a strict schedule and sometimes things get cancelled. I just don't understand why you'd conform to that when you could just watch whatever you want whenever you want using a computer. Plus, on a television, they force you to watch more commercials than actual show content.
Reply by hero of time Jun 23 2013 01:30 GMT

"52 inches seems really unnecessary to me."

Some people don't like staring straight into a monitor for long periods of time, and would rather relax in a comfortable home theater-style environment, with a couch, surround sound, a large (And thus more immersive) display, in no small part due to the fact that they actually want to fully experience the art.

"You don't really choose what you watch. It may be seperated into channels but its on a strict schedule and sometimes things get cancelled. I just don't understand why you'd conform to that when you could just watch whatever you want whenever you want using a computer. Plus, on a television, they force you to watch more commercials than actual show content."

Umm, DVR? On-demand? It sounds as if you haven't watched television since the early 90s (In which case you would have missed out on some of the finest pieces of human culture in the last 20-something years, such as Breaking Bad).

Reply by Lord Crump Jun 23 2013 01:37 GMT
Crump I would think you would know you can use a TV as a computer monitor. and DVR and other services are just pathetic hacks trying to emulate what you could do on a computer. I wouldn't have a problem with TV if it wasn't a waste of $30/month.
Reply by Fortran Jun 23 2013 03:02 GMT
By hooking up my computer to my television I have to get up and walk several feet to change whatever I want; with a remote I can switch channels instantly
And, again, I wouldn't be able to multi-task by doing that; I mentioned earlier that I like to leave the television running in the background while I use my computer
Also all of the good shows (Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Hannibal) you have to pay for access to anyway, unless you want to wait several hours/a day or so for it to pop up online, but by doing that you A). have to wait and risk spoilers and B). won't be able to live-blog it or anything
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 23 2013 04:12 GMT
crump your argument is crumbling down to "well I like it this way". Like I said, why not just get another monitor and show something in there? why not get a wireless keyboard? the only thing I can't respond to is the last bit, but that's just out of lack of knowledge about streaming or the availability of shows online. Though if I were to guess, I'm sure someone out there streams this stuff live. I don't know, though, just a guess, so I don't mean anything by it. It just sounds like a thing that would be a thing.
Reply by Fortran Jun 23 2013 04:43 GMT
It's broadcast vs on-demand. TV is just turn it on and you're done. Most people want someone else to choose what they watch. To be passive, yet still be entertained. That will never become obsolete.
Reply by Francis Jun 23 2013 04:58 GMT
Why get a another monitor when my computer is a laptop, which has a perfectly good built-in screen?
And the thing about wireless keyboards is that the vast majority of them are only good for about two to three feet away
Also, if I had my computer outputting to two monitors, there's that, plus running multiple processes for both the television and the game engine I'm developing in, which can already be a beast depending on what you're doing
Anyone who streams Game of Thrones live openly would in all likelihood be shut down by HBO within minutes of the episode's start
Reply by Lord Crump Jun 23 2013 05:21 GMT
Sign-in to post a reply.