Are you kidding me with these graphics?

[Woodsyblue]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

I didnt say that fans who dont care about the cartoony graphics are wrong at all look at what I posted.

Maybe you should look at what you posted, you said they were wrong about BttF. In fact your exact words were "Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style."

I'll also mention that you say they are wrong without saying why they are wrong. All you talk about is seriousness and who the true fans are, like you have the right to decide such things.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Also the reviewer also didnt like the art style and I didnt say graphics are the most important aspect, it just needs to look nicer I think graphics just a tad better than jurrasic park are perfect for bttf or law and order for all of telltales games really.(Not sam and max or Tales of Money Island or wallace and gromit)

Jurassic Park's graphics got blasted way worse than BttF, they look nice on the surface but the people and dinosaurs have stiff, unrealistic animations. On the whole people seemed more happy with the BttF graphics than JP's so I'm not quite sure why you are clambering for "just a tad better than jurrasic park" graphics.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Back to the future has odd silly scenes yes but overall people take it very seriously,

Back to the Future is all odd silly scenes. Almost every scene in the film is laden with gags and jokes. Look at the opening sequence, which sets the scene for the entire movie. You're in a house and the camera is panning past old newspaper articles, an absurd amount of clocks, and some of Doc's crazy inventions. Marty enters and flicks on a bunch of switches and turns up some dials to full one by one. He plugs his electric guitar into into a comically massive set of speakers. Then he plays a note on the guitar and the speaker explodes, the force of the explosion sends Marty flying into a La-Z-Boy on the other side of the room and a set of shelves collapses on him. He pulls himself out of the mess, unhurt and unscratched. 'Whoa, rock'n'roll,' he says. This is not something that happens in a serious film, it's more like a live action cartoon, right down to the slapstick. Less than five minutes into the film I've found an example of it not being serious. If you still don't believe me I can find a lot more. I think this live action cartoon style the film has is a big reason why a lot of people (though clearly not you) have accepted the cartoony art style of the game. The films are not totally unlike a cartoon, and thus cartoon visuals in the game are not out of place.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

you made it sound like a spoof the way you described it and failed to see the point of some of those scenes like the time machiene being a delorean or why he played the song Johnny B good in front of everyone,

You keep saying people take it seriously but just because you do but this doesn't mean the films take themselves seriously.

And don't say I've missed the point of the scenes. First off it's not best to challenge my film knowledge, I'm an A+ average cinema studies student and have spent a considerable amount of time dissecting films and looking at what makes them work. Second off, you are right about one thing, it's not a spoof it's a comedy, but it still doesn't take itself seriously, few comedies do.

You take it seriously, fine, but that doesn't mean the media associated with the franchise has to adhere to your vision of what the films are, especially when your vision is as misguided as thinking the films are serious. I think it's more important that they adhere to the spirit of the films, which is more cartoony in nature then I'm sure you're ever going to admit.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

It fits into being a comedy not a spoof, and usually comedys dont get so many refrences like:

> Nike Shoe's
> Argentina shop advert
>Tv advert
>Many quotes in films and tv programs (I have seen about 30)
>Huge refrence in the spike awards beginning
>One of the scenes played at the Oscars

And many more.

I don't understand the point of this list. So are you saying the films are high profile? Do you think the films being high profile somehow make them more serious than other comedies? I'm a bit lost by this to be perfictly honost.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

The people have put effort into making delorean time machienes and telltale dont even put effort into graphics.

Why do you think cartoony graphics equate a lack of effort? And we're talking about small, downloadable games here. Telltale needs to keep the file sizes low so people with bad internet connections can still have access to their games. There was never any hope that Telltale would have AAA realistic graphics, it's more a matter of art style.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

also because you keep saying I hate cartoony graphics, Thats a lie some of my favourite games are cartoony or Zork which has no graphics at all and I enjoy that game.

Good to hear, I just hope you give more respect to cartoony games then you do to animated movies.

Also, check your wording. I can't lie to you about what you like, only you can lie about what you like. I can accuse and you can admit or deny; that's about the extent of it.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

I just hate it when you take a film which is taken incredibly seriously by it's fans and give it crap graphics.

And I think this pet peeve of yours has blinded you to a couple of realities:

1) The majority of people don't agree with you on the art style.
2) The films aren't supposed to be serious, they're fun, over-the-top popcorn entertainment with some decent human drama thrown in to ground the experience.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Please open your mind and try and see like me and a lot of fans.
I respect your opinion but I am sure I am a bigger bttf fan than you and know more about that art style fits bttf than you.

I'm not the one with the closed mind here. Alas, you are still under the impression that your opinion on BttF's art style is the only one that matters. Why? Because you take it more seriously? You take Back to the Future so seriously you fail see how little it takes itself seriously. Yes, you're a fan but you don't seem to understand the subject of your fandom. Taking something seriously doesn't necessarily mean you understand it.

You really have yet to come up with a good reason why the BttF game should have had a realistic art direction. All you do is talk about seriousness and apparent unhappy fans who don't seem to be a numerous as you think they are. You keep saying the films are serious and yet you have provided no reasons why you think they are serious.

For both our sakes please explain, hopefully using examples, why you think BttF, which is filled with jokes and gags and unrealistic cartoony elements, is such a serious film series, because I don't understand where you are coming from with this.

[Vainamoinen]

Please take a bit of heat out of this discussion. Otherwise, continue.

Also, consider the results of this poll done in the BTTF forum on whether the game should have "cartoony" or "realistic" graphics:

http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/...ad.php?t=17272

With 419 voters, this is probably one of the most representative polls ever done on this forum.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by Woodsyblue

Maybe you should look at what you posted, you said they were wrong about BttF. In fact your exact words were "Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style."

I'll also mention that you say they are wrong without saying why they are wrong. All you talk about is seriousness and who the true fans are, like you have the right to decide such things.



Jurassic Park's graphics got blasted way worse than BttF, they look nice on the surface but the people and dinosaurs have stiff, unrealistic animations. On the whole people seemed more happy with the BttF graphics than JP's so I'm not quite sure why you are clambering for "just a tad better than jurrasic park" graphics.



Back to the Future is all odd silly scenes. Almost every scene in the film is laden with gags and jokes. Look at the opening sequence, which sets the scene for the entire movie. You're in a house and the camera is panning past old newspaper articles, an absurd amount of clocks, and some of Doc's crazy inventions. Marty enters and flicks on a bunch of switches and turns up some dials to full one by one. He plugs his electric guitar into into a comically massive set of speakers. Then he plays a note on the guitar and the speaker explodes, the force of the explosion sends Marty flying into a La-Z-Boy on the other side of the room and a set of shelves collapses on him. He pulls himself out of the mess, unhurt and unscratched. 'Whoa, rock'n'roll,' he says. This is not something that happens in a serious film, it's more like a live action cartoon, right down to the slapstick. Less than five minutes into the film I've found an example of it not being serious. If you still don't believe me I can find a lot more. I think this live action cartoon style the film has is a big reason why a lot of people (though clearly not you) have accepted the cartoony art style of the game. The films are not totally unlike a cartoon, and thus cartoon visuals in the game are not out of place.



You keep saying people take it seriously but just because you do but this doesn't mean the films take themselves seriously.

And don't say I've missed the point of the scenes. First off it's not best to challenge my film knowledge, I'm an A+ average cinema studies student and have spent a considerable amount of time dissecting films and looking at what makes them work. Second off, you are right about one thing, it's not a spoof it's a comedy, but it still doesn't take itself seriously, few comedies do.

You take it seriously, fine, but that doesn't mean the media associated with the franchise has to adhere to your vision of what the films are, especially when your vision is as misguided as thinking the films are serious. I think it's more important that they adhere to the spirit of the films, which is more cartoony in nature then I'm sure you're ever going to admit.



I don't understand the point of this list. So are you saying the films are high profile? Do you think the films being high profile somehow make them more serious than other comedies? I'm a bit lost by this to be perfictly honost.



Why do you think cartoony graphics equate a lack of effort? And we're talking about small, downloadable games here. Telltale needs to keep the file sizes low so people with bad internet connections can still have access to their games. There was never any hope that Telltale would have AAA realistic graphics, it's more a matter of art style.



Good to hear, I just hope you give more respect to cartoony games then you do to animated movies.

Also, check your wording. I can't lie to you about what you like, only you can lie about what you like. I can accuse and you can admit or deny; that's about the extent of it.



And I think this pet peeve of yours has blinded you to a couple of realities:

1) The majority of people don't agree with you on the art style.
2) The films aren't supposed to be serious, they're fun, over-the-top popcorn entertainment with some decent human drama thrown in to ground the experience.



I'm not the one with the closed mind here. Alas, you are still under the impression that your opinion on BttF's art style is the only one that matters. Why? Because you take it more seriously? You take Back to the Future so seriously you fail see how little it takes itself seriously. Yes, you're a fan but you don't seem to understand the subject of your fandom. Taking something seriously doesn't necessarily mean you understand it.

You really have yet to come up with a good reason why the BttF game should have had a realistic art direction. All you do is talk about seriousness and apparent unhappy fans who don't seem to be a numerous as you think they are. You keep saying the films are serious and yet you have provided no reasons why you think they are serious.

For both our sakes please explain, hopefully using examples, why you think BttF, which is filled with jokes and gags and unrealistic cartoony elements, is such a serious film series, because I don't understand where you are coming from with this.

Yes it is a comedy but look at star wars, do you think that is actually realistic, no but it is taken very seriously, I have watched behind the scene videos and Bob Gale or the rest of the bttf team have never said: ''we added that as a joke'' only time was with the delorean.

Because people keep saying the delorean is a stupid thing for time machiene, what do you think is better, a Limo?

Overall back to the future is taken very seriously and across the internet many people have complained about the art style saying things like: ''It is so stupid, does not fit bttf at all''

So you saying me and a few other people on the telltale forums are the only people who care about good respectable graphics is a lie.

Also you said you think The Untouchables would be perfect with bttf graphics, if you actually think that you are impossible to convince

Now I think this really needs to start being more about Law & Order.

[Falanca]

BttF does not rely on slapstick humor; the franchise is simply not as "dark" to give out more of a serious tone. But the thing is "cartoon style" never necessarily means CHILDISH or anything like that.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by Falanca

But the thing is "cartoon style" never necessarily means CHILDISH or anything like that.

Yes I admit I was wrong with that but I will never say that the art style bttf had was perfect, like I said something just a bit better than the jurrasic park art style would work really well.

[Woodsyblue]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Yes it is a comedy but look at star wars, do you think that is actually realistic, no but it is taken very seriously,

Just because people take something seriously doesn't mean it's serious. However, Star Wars is not a comedy, it's straight science fiction with a few good ad-libs. Star Wars is not set in our reality, there are different rules in the Star Wars universe. In the fictional universe the films take place in, light sabres and gay androids are not out of place. Science fiction fans are renowned for taking the things they love too seriously. With science fiction it's all about making the rules believable in their own context. The shows that succeed offer major escapism which drives a certain percentage of the population nuts. Star Wars isn't realistic to us, but it's realistic to people in the Star Wars universe.

Just so you know I don't think taking these things seriously is wrong. We all have our passions. But looking at something too seriously, especially if it's not something that's serious in the first place can blind you into thinking you know more about what you are a fan of then other people. You've repeatedly said you think you know more about what BttF: TG's art style should be like than me with the only basis for this being you think you are the bigger fan. You may like BttF more but that doesn't mean you know what's right for it.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

I have watched behind the scene videos and Bob Gale or the rest of the bttf team have never said: ''we added that as a joke'' only time was with the delorean.

Um, this doesn't prove your point, this doesn't prove your point even a little. BttF is filled with jokes and I can assure you that they are intentional on the part of the filmmakers. They put the jokes in and they know what they are doing.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Because people keep saying the delorean is a stupid thing for time machiene, what do you think is better, a Limo?

The delorean is an awesome time machine! Just because it's not taken seriously doesn't mean it's bad. I don't know you, but I feel it's very important that you learn this distinction.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Overall back to the future is taken very seriously and across the internet many people have complained about the art style saying things like: ''It is so stupid, does not fit bttf at all''

And even more people have said they feel it works. We've been over all this, you are talking about a vocal minority.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

So you saying me and a few other people on the telltale forums are the only people who care about good respectable graphics is a lie.

I've already told you once about using the word lie inappropriately and here you've gone and done it again. I'm not lying to anyone, I'm telling the truth as I know it. If you think I'm wrong back it up with evidence.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Also you said you think The Untouchables would be perfect with bttf graphics, if you actually think that you are impossible to convince

I never said The Untouchables with BttF graphics would be perfect, I said I could imagine it, and I can. Now again, I'm assuming you are talking about the 1987 movie and not the series, because you still haven't specified. I'm going to go off that assumption. Think about how stylised that film is, how all the characters look amazingly distinctive. Shape, size and dress sense every character in that film is unique and memorable. That's something that could translate very well to a cartoon-like art direction. You don't even need to tone down the violence. A cartoon-like art direction, if done right, would emphasis the distinctive style of the film. It'd never happen but then again five years ago I probably would have said the same about BttF.

Originally Posted by Falanca

BttF does not rely on slapstick humor; the franchise is simply not as "dark" to give out more of a serious tone. But the thing is "cartoon style" never necessarily means CHILDISH or anything like that.

In fairness I never said BttF relied on slapstick, only that it contained it, and it does. And you are right, BttF is many things but it's not dark. It's light-hearted family fun.

[caeska]

Originally Posted by Vainamoinen

Please take a bit of heat out of this discussion. Otherwise, continue.

Also, consider the results of this poll done in the BTTF forum on whether the game should have "cartoony" or "realistic" graphics:

http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/...ad.php?t=17272

With 419 voters, this is probably one of the most representative polls ever done on this forum.

400 votes that do not represent the thousands of people who have played the game, and who do not participate in discussions on this forum. Besides, it could just as easily be one guy making 260 accounts, and that certainly won't make the results of the poll true.
The fact of the matter is; realistic graphics are better than silly cartoony graphics and suit games like BTTF and Law & Order infinitely better.

[Falanca]

Originally Posted by Woodsyblue

In fairness I never said BttF relied on slapstick, only that it contained it, and it does. And you are right, BttF is many things but it's not dark. It's light-hearted family fun.

I just wanted to point out the slapstick usage in BttF should not be used to "describe" the franchise as a whole. But yeah, it's light-hearted enough to CONTAIN such scenes here and there.

I just cannot understand -nor attempt to do so- people claiming the SUPERIORITY of realism of visuals, over wacky interpretations which we call "cartoony". Not one of them is "better" than the other one, both are only to be used in where needed. Why is realism better? I mean is it better because more effort went it rendering the 3d models because of all the polygons, realistic dents and bulges on faces and stuff like that? I mean... What's your deal on this anyway? Does it really mean that they didn't put enough effort on models and visuals when the graphics aren't over-detailed? No, I mean, realistic visuals is tracing of your surroundings or recreating it on a sheet of paper or a 3d virtual environment. The term "cartoon" involves INTERPRETATION, freedom of changing certain aspects of reality as you want and visualizing it this way. You need to have a feel of "style" so that your version of this reality won't look off or unfaithful to the original material. There IS a big amount of effort, you just don't see it all because most of the effort is hidden behind what you're presented.

[TaeZ]

I am a huge bttf fan and I like graphics in game. I don't see why anyone wouldn't. Characters were recognizable, environments were all nice and in matching art style. I think someone's taste in graphics has nothing to do with a person being a Telltale fanboy or a fanboy of franchise they're making game for. One thing I don't like though in some of Telltale's games are characters eyes, they're very inanimate and sometimes look very weird especially when looking down.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by Woodsyblue

It's light-hearted family fun.

Your horribly wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7RKdWnUgLM

Watch all of it and dont skip any bits of it.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by TaeZ

I don't see why anyone wouldn't.

Maybe because the graphics dont match, the film is taken seriously by it's fans and the graphics look weird and make the people look diffrent.

You can have your own opinion sure, but if you think having minecraft graphics would be better than good graphics im not sure your a real fan.

[Vainamoinen]

Originally Posted by caeska

400 votes that do not represent the thousands of people who have played the game, and who do not participate in discussions on this forum. Besides, it could just as easily be one guy making 260 accounts, and that certainly won't make the results of the poll true.
The fact of the matter is; realistic graphics are better than silly cartoony graphics and suit games like BTTF and Law & Order infinitely better.

I did not quote that poll for the ultimate "truth", but quite explicitly "for your consideration" only. But it seems like I have to throw in a bit of interpretation as well.

First, no, this can explicitly not be one guy making 270 accounts (or one guy making 150 for that matter). The attempt to manipulate polls that way is very rare on these forums and the manipulator is practically always caught. No sane community member goes through the pain of making several accounts (which is considered trolling and a bannable offense already) just to push some numbers here. To my knowledge, it has occurred only when the manipulator thought he or she could actually win something by doing it - i.e. when contest polls were made. Needless to say, those people are always caught.

Second, concerning the specific sample of people that were voting here: We must assume that they consist of hardcore TTG and BTTF fans. The TTG fans in anticipation of the next game and the BTTF fans freshly swept into this forum just trying to make their voice heard. There's no point in discussing how representative this is concerning ALL eventual players of BTTF. Most of them were just going with what they got later on. If there's any wisdom to be found in this poll, you would of course at best consider this a rather big sample of the people who anticipated the game most at a time when hardly anything was known about how the game would eventually look.

Third, this poll hardly shows an overwhelming result for the cartoony graphics "side". It fails to reach a two thirds majority even. Hell, I don't even know what I voted on this poll because I explicitly dismissed a classification of graphics as "cartoony" and "realistic" along a linear continuum. That is something that might come along with a serious interest in the graphic design topic...

Originally Posted by Vainamoinen

It doesn't exist. That's the whole problem with asking if you'd like "realistic" graphics or not. EVERY computer graphic representation has some degree of abstraction. And abstraction does not lie along a continuum. You don't just "crank up/down the abstraction" when producing art.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by Vainamoinen

First, no, this can explicitly not be one guy making 270 accounts (or one guy making 150 for that matter).

Im not sure he ment that I think he ment that there are millions of fans of bttf and some of them dont even know there is a game so you cant really say that 100 people voting for cartoony graphics is fair because you have to remeber this is telltalegames website and there are going to be hundreds of fans of telltale on here who are more likely to support cartoony graphics than realistic graphics, well thats what I got from what he said anyway :P

[Vainamoinen]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Im not sure he ment that I think he ment that there are millions of fans of bttf and some of them dont even know there is a game so you cant really say that 100 people voting for cartoony graphics is fair because you have to remeber this is telltalegames website and there are going to be hundreds of fans of telltale on here who are more likely to support cartoony graphics than realistic graphics, well thats what I got from what he said anyway :P

So what you are saying is: It would not be fair to consider this rather impressive sample of TTG's and BTTF's dearest, most hardcorest fans and most likely pre-order customers?

Taken the gravity of both sides' arguments into account, I'd still say the relevance of this poll is not to be underestimated.

[yoman45135]

Originally Posted by Vainamoinen

So what you are saying is: It would not be fair to consider this rather impressive sample of TTG's and BTTF's dearest, most hardcorest fans and most likely pre-order customers?

Taken the gravity of both sides' arguments into account, I'd still say the relevance of this poll is not to be underestimated.

The people who voted cartoony are more likely to be ttg fans give or take 10 - 30 bttf fans

[Vainamoinen]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

The people who voted cartoony are more likely to be ttg fans give or take 10 - 30 bttf fans

You were obviously late to that party...


/edit: There seems to be some confusion concerning this short answer. What I meant was that the influx of BTTF fans into these forums in the months between June 2010 (first announcement) and December 2010 (first episode released) was HUGE. Seriously, incomparable to anything that has happened before or afterwards. So many new community members, it was mind-boggling. In the poll discussion, if you count only those people who registered June to October 2010, you get to 19 who came first and foremost for BTTF, and a fair share of those arguments FOR cartoony graphics.

[Woodsyblue]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Your horribly wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7RKdWnUgLM

Watch all of it and dont skip any bits of it.

The film is not for little kids but that doesn't mean it takes itself seriously. In fact, the only reason they are able to get away with all that stuff in a family film is because it doesn't take itself seriously. If it were a serious film people would be appalled!

Look at the first example in the video, Doc getting shot up by the Libyan terrorists. It uses the same cartoon logic that was brought up in the exploding speaker scene. Doc is pumped full of holes at close range by an AK-47 but there is no blood or gore, even in the timeline where he is actually killed. It's as PG as a brutal, cold-blooded, close-range shooting is ever going to be. It's cartoon violence: all of the intention of real violence with none of the actual brutality.

Also, how young were you when you watched the first film? Be honest. If you were really young did you feel traumatised by the events in the film, like the host of that video implied you would have been? I know I sure wasn't.

Originally Posted by yoman45135

Maybe because the graphics dont match, the film is taken seriously by it's fans and the graphics look weird and make the people look diffrent.

You can have your own opinion sure, but if you think having minecraft graphics would be better than good graphics im not sure your a real fan.

BttF is hardly Minecraft, you are taking your hyperbole too far.

OK, you keep saying 'the film is taken seriously by it's fans.' You can't speak on behalf of other BttF fans, you can only convey your own opinion. You're opinion is that you think the game uses the wrong art direction, and you are entitled to that opinion, but you can't say that there are all these BttF fans out there that agree with you that it's something to be taken seriously. Only they can talk for themselves.

The only qualifiers that you seem to use to label someone a real BttF fan is how much they agree with you on the issue of art style on the BttF game and how seriously they take the films. You are saying that people who disagree with you might not be real fans (at least that's what you've said about me and TaeZ) and that the real fans are the people who agree with you. This is such a dangerous way to think. You are using labels to discredit in your own mind another person's opinion. "Oh, what he says doesn't mean anything, he's not a real BttF fan. A real BttF fan wouldn't think that." (Dramatization, not intended to be taken as the literal workings of your mind.) If you play these mental gymnastics you'll always convince yourself you are right even if you don't have any evidence or reason to feel the way you do.

What is a fan? Somebody who likes something. But just because you like something doesn't mean you have the right to tell other people what's right and what isn't. Stick to saying your own opinion and the reason you came to that opinion. You don't even have the right to say who is a true fan and who isn't. Anybody who likes it is a fan and everybody, fan or not, is entitled to an opinion (as long as they are educated on the subject).

You are belittling TaeZ's opinion because you don't think he's a true fan as you put it. You are literally saying if he thinks having minecraft graphics would be better than, as you put it, 'good graphics,' he's not a real fan. He's a real fan if he likes the franchise. What right do you have to take that away from him?

[Vainamoinen]

The idea that "true fans" would necessarily go for a realistic approach is certainly inappropriate. There are quite a lot of "true fans" out there who accept the animated series wholeheartedly (personally, I don't).

80's US movies were a lot more violent than today's. What gets parents up in arms today wasn't really a problem yesterday. So, yes, BTTF is a family movie. I was 12 when I first saw it. What stuck were skateboards & rock'n'roll, not terrorists and rape attempts. BTW, the Lybians were as cartoony a terrorist threat as humanly possible in a live action movie.

I recently saw "Adventures in Babysitting" (1987) again. Was pretty shocked actually. That was PG-13, that was an unquestionable family movie back then. Attempted murder, organized crime, chop shops, gang fights, shootouts, adultery, playboy magazines, hookers, swearing and what have you, it's all in there. That was 80's family entertainment, and BTTF was the milder variety.

[NSM]

Originally Posted by yoman45135

The people who voted cartoony are more likely to be ttg fans give or take 10 - 30 bttf fans

I feel like I'm going crazy, because people are responding reasonably to a comment that makes no sense to me. The people who voted cartoony are more like to be Telltale Games fans? On what basis do you make that assertion? Why are TTG fans and BTTF fans now mutually exclusive groups?

[Vainamoinen]

Originally Posted by NSM

I feel like I'm going crazy, because people are responding reasonably to a comment that makes no sense to me.

...that's how we roll.

Originally Posted by NSM

Why are TTG fans and BTTF fans now mutually exclusive groups?

Good point. I was about the biggest BTTF fan alive when this game was announced. I came here earlier for ToMI and S&M noneteless.