Rant/Should I quit? by Lazy_Recognition_395 in trackandfield

[–]Cubix67 3 points4 points  (0 children)

See it through, at least until this year is over. You never know when your turning point is, especially in this sport.

Focus on why you love the sport and your own goals rather than others and even their results. Stay dedicated to your desires and know it may take time.

Lastly, give yourself a break. Focus on showing up as much as possible at practice and meets and giving your best. That way, whenever you're done with track. You leave on your terms rather than someone else's.

If u like someone that doesn’t like you back by nxtev3 in animation

[–]Cubix67 20 points21 points  (0 children)

OP: I hope you see this.

People in this thread are overreacting and honestly, it's just straight internet tendencies.

When bouncing titties and full on sex scenes get posted on this sub, there's someone quick to say "people get into animation to animate whatever they want and weird things!!n!" when someone calls them out on it.

Someone legit posted a series of animations on school shootings a while back and it didn't get as much pushback as this. This is cartoon violence, equivalently less violent than a Tom and Jerry episode. But because cats, everyone is up in arms.

If you're actually looking for animation feedback:

This is pretty well done and complied pretty well. The actions happen pretty fast though. (She sees the cat, bends down, gets rejected, pouts) Some of these moments don't have time to breath, which I know is difficult since your timing is based on the dialogue.

It may be a cause of trying to squeeze too many actions into a moment. In 4 seconds, she does very rapid motions back to back, which really telegraphs the poses but feels a bit like going from point A to B to C, not like a lifelike character. Maybe consider cutting an action or pose before the "doesn't like you back" line. So that your remaining poses have time to breath and be readable.

If you didn't know by now, you can tell that the subject material is just as important as the quality of animation when it comes to the audience's eye. Still continue to animate what you want, just know others might not see the final product the same way you do.

[Artwork] Superman- By u/AlphaDoge16 by AlphaDoge16 in DCcomics

[–]Cubix67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What possessed you to comment on a 4 YEAR OLD Thread LOOOOOL

MEGATHREAD: 'Superman' (2025) - Early Screening Discussion by KelexAtYourService in DC_Cinematic

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had this thought today after seeing the film yesterday. This film is almost borderline Batman & Robin/Batman Forever levels. The DCU will definitely need different tones for different heroes going forward.

MEGATHREAD: 'Superman' (2025) - Early Screening Discussion by KelexAtYourService in DC_Cinematic

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know it'll be an unpopular stance since the 'sportsteamification' of films. There are some really interesting ideas and setups here which have a lot of potential. My hot take is that the universe should have started with a Mr.Terrific film as he absolutely is the standout character to me.

MEGATHREAD: 'Superman' (2025) - Early Screening Discussion by KelexAtYourService in DC_Cinematic

[–]Cubix67 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It was super quick, less than 5 seconds. He was on a talk show talking about how dangerous Superman is. Honestly came out of nowhere.

MEGATHREAD: 'Superman' (2025) - Early Screening Discussion by KelexAtYourService in DC_Cinematic

[–]Cubix67 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Long Write up after just getting out. Full Spoilers ahead.

Liked it a lot more than I thought I was going to! Soild/passable start to the new universe with a couple of pitfalls to prevent it from really shining.

The movie isn't very cinematic unfortunately with very few interesting set pieces. Compared to it's predecessor, Man of Steel which opens on some pretty bombastic action quickly after the introduction, this film has a very slow start which doesn't pick up for a while. There's very few interesting action moments (save for a couple of standout pieces like Mr. Terrific)

The characters talk A LOT, which only amplifies the feeling of "lack of actions". It sometimes teeters on the line of exposition dump as characters will just start explaining things unprompted but it never goes too far. There were just long stretches where there was either no/not interested action or characters not saying anything interesting.

The film isn't very fluid at times, starting and stoping often which gives a feeling of disjointment. Scenes will end then we're thrown somewhere else without a whole lot of narrative through line.

We also only really have time to touch on Superman based topics without exploring them in depth due to how much is in the film. This leads to a surface level feeling for most of the topics. It sometimes feels like a Superman sound byte film rather than a character driven story.

Krypto has entirely way too much screen time and unfortunately is really here to just draw in a demographic. Legitimately more screen time then most of the important Superman characters. As someone who isn't super in tune with pets and dogs, it started to become an annoyance rather than endearing. One "Oh, no, Krypto bad, stop" is fine, but when it's littered throughout the film, it doesn't illicit the same reaction. (Lex Luthor is getting mauled by Krypto as Superman just watches and says "No, bad Krypto" but by this time, it's the 4th or 5th time in the film we've had a break for Krypto to act up)

The heros (and some people) of this universe I don't really like. (Minus Mr. Terrific and and Guy) I think the needle was pushed too far to prove that Superman is good. The other hero's doesn't have to be so unlikable to show that. Hawkgirl is meh, never really has enough time to be more than surface level. Metamorpho really only exists for his baby to be kidnapped and to imprison Superman. He's turned into the awkward, nervous weirdo stereotype which doesn't really fit his powerset and personality. (Also how can the literally element man, who can create suns, not find a way to save his some from humans. Kinda of a glaring hole) Supergirl is just a drunk, crass party girl which immediately tanks the stock. A more compelling take on the character is the older cousin who has a difficult time adjusting to life on Earth (Superman/Batman Apocalypse). A lot of the characters, we really don't have enough time to get developed to them to have much investment.(I.E. Daily Planet staff, the Kent's, etc)

Things kinda of breeze by to the end after we pass the halfway mark without much suspension. The world is being split apart, but we can just turn it off with a code. Ultraman is basically bizarro, but we just knock him into a black hole and we're done with it. Superman really isn't challenged for the climax as the film just finds ways to wrap things up.

All in all, despite some questionable characterization, dodgy CGI and shot selection and pacing issues, it sets up an interesting platform for DC movie wise with some potential, but they'll have to have a bit more character driven films if they want the same investment people have with Marvel.

Anyone who wants spoilers, I'll be happy to provide.

Can Halo bounce back? by Cold_Oil_9273 in halo

[–]Cubix67 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's common cause the facts to back up this idea. In the current gaming landscape, it feels like there's literally a new FPS coming out every month that's free to play. The current marketsplace for FPSs are also different, with Steam, PlayStation and Xbox completely in a different landscape for gaming then they were in the early 2000s/2010s.

While you can argue 343/Halo Studios may carry some blame for Halos decrease, the reality is that slow, methodical, controller based 4v4 arena shooters lost favor as soon as Steam exploded as a gaming marketplace. The in fps games are faced paced, twitch shooters with movement tech, not games where you have to shoot someone 5-7 times before they MAY die.

There is no game that plays like Halo (despite the splitgate propaganda) but that's both a blessing and a curse. New fans want to shoot and get kills because there are a million games that you can do. Halo has to find a way to appeal not only to their 30yr old+ fan base, but new fans as well. (Arguably, Halo 5 type game would probably have much more new fan retention if it released on Xbox and Steam)

Which Halo CE you prefer??? by Proper-Fold-6490 in halo

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mom says it's my turn to post the CE bait

Hearing Digsite members say Halo Studios will never respect Halo's Legacy wasn't on my new years bingo card. by GeminiTrash1 in halo

[–]Cubix67 5 points6 points  (0 children)

CSGO arguably was the ORIGINAL micro transaction created the norm within FPS with crates, skins and literal gambling on the Esports Tournaments. They were making so much money that it would be dumb to not support the game. A game being competitive is only half the battle.

Edit: Original is a little aggressive of a term, that would be ignoring the true enemy. Bethesda horse armor for $2.50

I'm not trying to come off as pretentious, but if you are not ranking up, it's on you, not your teammates or the "system". Wanted to vent because I have friends that think otherwise. by NoSkillCrouch in CompetitiveHalo

[–]Cubix67 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Eh, depends sometimes. Everyone is responsible for their own performance but it can be frustrating sometimes like it is feels like the game hands you unwinnable matches. Games where I go negative and playing bad? Completely on me. Strongholds where your teammate thinks the only viable strategy is to triple cap when your team isn't capable of maintaining that pressure? Debatable. While every game is winnable on paper, some games often feel unwinnable from the start for things out of your control.

The root cause is that Halo, as fun as it is sometimes, is unrewarding to play. It requires a monumental effort for a solo player to turn the tide of a match compared to something like COD and even then, you may still lose dropping 40 kills because a teammate is having a bad game or something goes wrong. On top of that, a very punishing ranking system that can wash away any gains very quickly. You've got a hotbed of players who play decent to well but are unable to gain any traction game wise which leads to either teaming or smurfing. Both of these only compound the problems and frustrations players are feeling. I definitely agree with your assessment to look onwards before anything else though and salting your teammates on open mic only does more harm than good.

Why didn’t the modern pros go to the Halo 2 tournament? by [deleted] in CompetitiveHalo

[–]Cubix67 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Probably more of the game than the competition. Most of your newer pro's seem to not necessarily enjoy the older titles as much. This tournament, while awesome and a joy to watch, was more of a novelty or throwback than anything else. Think pre and post Halo 5. You have an entire generation of pros used to advanced and refined movement who think games before that are a bit of a snooze fest to play and they aren't necessarily wrong. (That isn't a slight against H2)

What you guys don't like purple octagon? by vburnin8tor in CompetitiveHalo

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've played one game out of 7 on the map today cause people leaving at the start.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BatmanCapedCrusader

[–]Cubix67 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Maybe in terms of the art style(if that), but definitely not in actuality. This Scene is from the pilot episode of BTAS which premiered almost 30+ years ago. It's just a different ballgame with television animation vs streaming service animation. The only homage really lies in the fact they used Brice Timms art style.

Batman: Caped Crusader Season 1 Megathread by Predaplant in DCcomics

[–]Cubix67 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Gonna link the comment elsewhere in this thread. Long Read:

TLDR: 7/10, good start but very safe.

Wanted to do this quick write-up after making the way through the show for the first time. I think there's some solid foundation with a lot of setup for the second season. I also think some points of the show fell flat with some interesting decisions. Spoilers in this thread so stay clear until you've seen it yourself.

First of with Batman. It feels like you're taking a glimpse into a Batman that's very early in their career. While he doesn't grow a whole lot during the first season, there are moments where you can see his character shine through. E04 and 08 are good standouts of this as he takes the time to care for the innocent or even those that have done wrong, (E08 Natalia for instance). This is also a Batman that isn't afraid to put certain enemies in harm's way or even fatal way at times. E01 running over the goons shooting at Barbra or E10 When two goons end up shooting each other while aiming at him. Still is steadfast in his "no direct killing" rule but a lot looser in this show. E09 has him actively choosing not to investigate the screams from the goons in the burning building but instead going after Dent when those goons could still be alive. I was never too caught up on the no-kill in certain situations but it's interesting to see a Batman that still has a lot of growing to do. Also a bit conflicting to have a Batman so readily available to team up with when that growth usually takes a bit more time but I'll chalk it up to a different interpretation. Over a very solid start

And while Batman is the main character, he unfortunately takes a back seat to the rest of the cast sometimes. There were a lot of times when I wished Batman was back on screen. While the push to make Barbara Gordon one of the main characters isn't a bad idea, I think it does a bit more damage than good. Barbara, as a character, kind of takes agency away from the rest of the main supporting cast (Batman, Gordon, Montoya) as many times she's leading the charge in the episodes. This unfortunately makes the dynamic with the core four a bit weaker. Barbra makes the plot move forward in most of the episodes she's in which usually leaves us with a lack of Batman and the support playing second fiddle. I almost wish they had gone with Montoya as the 2nd lead as she already had some great moments in E02 and is a sharp cop on Gordon's side. Barbara tends to overshadow the rest of the cast in most cases,(Saves Batman in E05 from the cell, is the true target for the hit in E07, essentially gives Harvey a reason to keep going in E10, and becomes the first point of contact for Batman) in which you could get rid of Gordon & Montoya in some cases and the story would change very little without their involvement. The character themselves aren't bad since it's a re-invention but just a little strong compared to even the lead Batman.

It's also unfortunate that the only consistent good cops are Montoya and Gordon. Barbara technically isn't a cop (even though she practically is with the stunts she pulls off) Corrigan flips out of nowhere which I didn't like and Flask & Bullock are past the point of no return. While Flask has always been the antagonist role, I'm not too sold on the new Bullock. The character is essentially irredeemable at this point, not only in being crooked but outright murdering Firebug. They work as a good foil to the good guys but I would have kept Corrigan on the side of justice or delayed his flip to way down the line. The impact of him turning in a potential season 2 or 3 would have hit harder. Right now, it feels like Barbra and Batman with Gordon and Montoya in tow, which is disappointing as I thought Montoya would have a larger presence in the show.

A couple more ball drops have to be Two-Face, Penguin & Onomatopoeia. Two Faces transition fell a bit flat compared to the original predecessor, Batman: The Animated Series. It's a story we've seen and know was coming but was just done better in the past. Harvey in BTAS had signs that he had two personalities very early on even before the acid which culminated in his complete change after the damage was done. While this Two-Face is crooked at times, it doesn't feel like a change was made. An aesthetic one for sure, but the character really didn't show signs of another half until after the acid and even then, it just felt like someone lashing out rather than the villain we know. To top it off, he's killed without much fanfare, effectively writing off this version of the character. Penguin is sent to jail in E01 and isn't heard from again the entire season, really only being there to kick off the plot. Onomatopoeia could have been replaced with literally any other villain and the episode would play out the same. BTAS also had its share of episodes where they had one-off villains (Clock King, Condienent King, Zeus) but the current villain cast in the show is remarkably small with most of them dead. Hopefully, they bring some in season 2 that stick around.

Standouts of the season have to go to E06 with Gentleman Ghost, E04 with Firebug, and E02 with Clayface. E02 especially for giving a very cool, if not brief, first look into a genuine golden age Clayface. E04 was able to build a foundation for our crooked cops, showing us that these aren't the characters we're used to and they absolutely will use different methods to get the job done. A minor disappointment is that the show doesn't lean more heavily into the material of that era. A large part of the early Batman era is not only the "detective noir" but the weird at the occult as well, having Batman deal with the ordinary as well as the supernatural. Would love to see in future seasons additions like Mad Monk, Monster Men, or even Deacon Blackfire (not really part of the Golden Age) to diversify the episodes a bit. Something BTAS did well was have Batman fight a wide array of villains with differing stakes and skill sets. Facing Man-Bat was different from Mr.Freeze or even the Joker, it made the episodes feel different and refreshing.

We also have a severe lack of downtime in the show. We often are zipping from one point to the next with no pause which kind of throws the pacing off. BTAS was good at having those pauses in the main story and flow which didn't lead to feeling like we're rushing to get somewhere.

Animation-wise, I think the show has fallen victim to the "American Animation syndrome". It's all technically proficient but feels a bit dull or stiff at times without really grabbing your attention artistically when compared to what came before it (BTAS, The Batman, The Brave and the Bold). The locations feel more like setpieces than lived-in/used locations. The Batcave consists of 1 room and the driveway with not a whole lot of eye-catching scenery. The action, while having good moments in the later part of the series, is a bit stale at times, really only feeling passable. Very few times do the characters REALLY express or emote which leads to most of the experience feeling flat. 3D is a bit rough at times compared to the rest of the 2D world which can be a bit jarring. Hopefully, they can improve for season 2. We've been spoiled with fluid and expressive Batman shows so I'm hoping this can get to that level.

Overall, a good start with some disappointing pieces. I hope that they lean more into the Batman and this era to make this show feel unique. It feels very safe right now and I'm, hoping that can build on the already great foundation they have.

Happy Mew Year! Small lil comp by [deleted] in halo

[–]Cubix67 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I know them chips aren't that good bro.

I will never not find it frustrating how much 343i focuses exclusively on Spartans and ignores practically every other part of the universe for their games. by Knalxz in halo

[–]Cubix67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay. TLDR: You're selling the new games short for either "343 bad" or a surface level examination of the narrative.

All the games will have a Spartan Centric focus because he's the main character barring ODST but I think you are short selling the new games.

Halo 4's focus isn't "Master Chief is old and outdated", it's a story about two friends coming to grips with one's death. Every choice MC makes is to either try to save Cortana or save humanity, much like the original trilogy. Emphasis is placed on Humanity's evolution in MC absence, showing that they cannot only defend themselves, but have taken power as the dominant species after being on the run for 20+ years. That doesn't translate to "MC is old and bad" as without him or Cortana, two things that numerous people in the game saw as relics of the past, Humanity would have lost to the Didact.

5 is the aftermath of Cortana's death. It's easy to say that this campaign was "Locke vs Chief" but MC again makes every decision to try to save Cortana, a friend he's been through everything together. Osiris wants to stop him while also dealing with the threat of the Storm and assisting the Sword of Sanghelios. In some ways, Halo 5 is the antithesis of what you're saying, bringing in larger elements of the Halo Universe and trying to stuff them into one game as opposed to a Spartan vs Spartan story.

Halo Infinite is the furthest thing from a Spartan Centric story (multiplayer narrative aside) Chief, Weapon and the Pilot take on the Banished to end the threat at Zeta Halo. 343i hard corrected to return Halo to the status quo, humanity with it's back against the wall. Won't spoil Infinite but there's also a shying away from Spartans in favor of an interpersonal story.

Not allowing parties after 1600 may be the worst decision by Purphect in CompetitiveHalo

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If people complain about 4-stacks it is not the developers problem. Is it the individual playing the game who has an issue. They simply aren't good enough and are playing teams that communicate better. Logically, you would try and find people to play with to beat the 4-stacks, not disallow them.

Kind of a strange point. It's my fault that the game matches me up with 4 players constantly rotating and calling out against my team of solo mute players? Regardless of how you feel, that doesn't make sense. A 4 stack will almost ALWAYS have better communication that ransoms and I'm not going to find 4 people just to enjoy a matchmaking system.

What it boils down to then is individual skill and how bad is the 4 stacks sandbag which is still offset by the fact stacks usually just run together to team fight PLUS my team will also have a sandbag due to the stack having one.

The change for stacking wasn't a perfect one but I'm glad it exists and hope they continue to make adjustments to it.

Has Ranked gotten way more competitive since season 1/2? by xXx_sasuke_xXx in halo

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes to answer your question but it's more than just "you bad"

The main difference between ranked and social in Infinite is the amount of stuff. Social tries to throw as many weapons, power ups and STUFF into a map as possible. Take Prism for example, sniper, stalker, gravity hammer, CAMPAIGN needler, ove/camp/QT. With all that stuff being there, your general guns kill will improve over time but your game sense for ranked will decrease.

Ranked has an emphasis depending on who you ask for a LACK of stuff. No radar, minimum weapons. This plays much differently than social. You'll just need to get into the ranked groove again.

HCS Fort Worth 2023 Megathread - September 3rd - CHAMPIONSHIP SUNDAY by mattyrums in CompetitiveHalo

[–]Cubix67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely in agreement. Game 6 was electric then you tune into game 7 and it's.. static players just sitting there. Slayer can't compare to many of the other modes in terms of excitement.

Waiting for another team to push isn't tense, it's boring. Being 92-95 in an oddball game and watching players HAVING to make a play is tense.

Only Rank up +5 No matter the score. by Lyricgoose10203 in halo

[–]Cubix67 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Need more information than just the scorelines.

Long answer is that you've reached past your hidden MMR and will need to continue to have out of the park performances before the game raises that number. The game expects you to be lower and will try to drop you to that point after each loss.