Comments on: How to Destroy a Universe in Order to Make Money in 6 Easy Steps

By: Protector one

Protector one — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:48:46 +0000

That alternate ending might be less fuzzy, but is also totally lame! “Michael Jackson turned 40″? “Instead I got drunk”? It is ‘Terminator 3D’-bad.

By: slicedlime

slicedlime — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:08:28 +0000

I agree, it's possible. My point, though, is that people *felt* cheated in some way or other. And regardless of how much rational logical explanatory weight you feel you have behind your reasoning, your fans feeling cheated is a good sign something's wrong. A couple of links to illustrate what I mean: - Review of T3 expressing the problem - "Deleted scene" from T2 with an alternate, less fuzzy, ending. This makes it pretty clear that, at the time of the creation of T2, the storyline was meant to decisively end.

By: Protector one

Protector one — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:41:01 +0000

Yeah, I saw those links in your Twitter stream.
I believe the story of T2 was possible, because in Terminator’s world, when you travel back in time, you end up in an different time-line. That’s also why Reese could become John’s dad.
I don’t like this type of time travel either, but many pieces of fiction do it like this. :S

By: slicedlime

slicedlime — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:59:06 +0000

The whole plot of T2 was essentially that the people who built skynet did so based on tech that was only possible to build with the chip they had (yeah, there's some circular reasoning in there). I agree that it's not as clearcut a case, but I know many people felt that the "our future's our own" ending was diminished by the continuation of the series. Also, check out this place and these guys.

By: Protector one

Protector one — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:06:15 +0000

So how was the ending of Terminator 2 un-ended? I thought everything that came after T2 respected how it ended.
As a side note, pod racing is awesome.

By: Paul Evans

Paul Evans — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:04:25 +0000

Great article! Additionally I think some of the drive for sequels are driven by publishers attempting to develop a franchise they can exploit with ancillary products rather than just a single game. I guess the recent commentary made by Activision’s CEO and what happened to the Ghostbusters game illustrates that way of thinking.

By: Johan Svensson

Johan Svensson — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:45:06 +0000

“Nuking the fridge” totally made me want to see that Indy movie.

The Doom games coined the expression “monster closet” – a section of the map that opens up on a trigger, with the sole purpose of throwing more monsters at the player. Those early games had no other way to spawn enemies apart from pre-placed monsters, so that was the only way to do it.

And then Doom 3 just kept doing it, and it felt horribly primitive and out of place.