This video was taking too long and I got bored, so I sped it up to double using youtube's video speeding feature... they were still moving slow as hell, but for some reason it felt like they were moving super fast.

Or, if you want to think like someone who is more interested in games than novels, come up with interesting new genres with fun gameplay instead of making another generic FPS created entirely to demonstrate that you have the latest and greatest PC hardware. But this is Crytek we are talking to here... all they know is…

I don't think they have. I think a lot of people didn't end up playing GTA:O that much, but that's really no skin off their ass unless you were also going to buy money, and I think that was a very small portion of players who would do that.

Again, I was wrong to say it wasn't hand drawn. Like I said, I was thinking on a different scale at the time. And I seriously just mean it's cheap compared to something like Korra which is also hand drawn (to the same degree), but involves more detail and shading.

It's not though. Each frame of character animation is drawn on a computer and arranged by hand per frame, but it isn't like you've got people painting cels by hand and arranging them by hand on with a multiplanar camera. When they say it's hand drawn frame by frame, they really just mean that the characters don't have…

Sorry, I came off strong with that last one and it won't let me edit. I shouldn't dismiss it as not being hand-drawn obviously, it's just that I've been talking about Don Bluth + Secret of Nimh lately, so I have a different frame of mind right now for what hand drawn means.

Clarification: I mean not on a computer, not that it isn't hand drawn on a tablet or something. It obviously isn't tweened animation, but it's not like old school hand drawn animation.

Bullshit. I know hand drawn animation when I see it and Adventure Time isn't it. Hell, barely anything around today is hand drawn. The storyboards are hand drawn, but I'm pretty sure that's it.

Man... I had a 52" 480i TV back in the day. At the time it was considered awesome.

I don't have a setup issue. I perceive this effect the same way at movie theaters, and most of them have projectors that only do 24fps. It's the same using my bluray player as it is if I use my WDTV Live (which also allows me to set the frequency that it sends at). Believe me, I know what I'm doing when it comes to…

It's both actually. The whole up/down stepping thing where some frames get doubled while others get tripled is a different thing that is also annoying, but that's not a problem in my case since my television supports 24, 30, 60, and 120hz signals. (It has a 120hz refresh rate, so it just does 5x duplication per frame…

What's really depressing is that what we've learned from this whole debacle is that there is really no network that can adequately support a show like the Avatar series where the audience caters more towards adult sensibilities. With Cartoon Network they are almost never willing to put down the budget when they can…

Not in 2014 it isn't. I haven't seen TVs without HDMI inputs for sale in many years now.

http://xkcd.com/1098/

Just because I think something is crappy in one quality doesn't mean I completely dismiss it.

Someone missed out on the whole Peter Jackson Hobbit discussion. Yes, movie framerates are crap and you'd realize that if you ever noticed saw how choppy long camera pans across large environments are.

They you probably have a television handy already, now don't you?

Not necessarily. The problem might have been that they couldn't get 8 sets of Ice Climbers going simultaneously while still maintaining full frames and decided they cared more about 8 player smash than Ice Climbers.

*plugs into computer monitor*

That's a humorous way of putting it.