|
Hakkesshu posted:The whole Inhuman thing is mainly due to Marvel pushing an event book called Inhumanity last year but that was tanked by production issues, and they haven't really done anything with them since. I don't think there's any real evidence of them being incorporated into the MCU, but even so they literally cannot use the word mutants, so who cares what other term they use? Ms. Marvel is a hit for them and she is an inhuman. The series also had a shitton of delays, but is now back on a regular schedule.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Sure, but the fact that Ms. Marvel is an Inhuman is entirely irrelevant to that book, and Soule's Inhuman isn't exactly indicative of any significant trend, even though I think it's quite good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Anyways, there's like a ton of Inhumans, but only 4 (not including Kamala Khan) that anyone cares about; Black Bolt, Medusa, depending on the current prominence, Maximus or Crystal, and Lockjaw. I doubt they're saving Triton or Karnak for their big hit film.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Is 'metahuman' copyrighted in anyway? That's DC's standard term now, but I could have sworn they've used in on this show. Am I misremembering things?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
!!!! http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/11/business/media/tv-ratings-by-nielsen-had-errors-for-months.html?_r=0 Could probably post this everywhere in TVIV I guess but, drat...
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
The Red Queen posted:!!!! Wouldn't that mean AoS rating are even lower than they already are? Last episode was apparently a series low, unless its been adjusted up again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Wouldn't that mean AoS rating are even lower than they already are? Last episode was apparently a series low, unless its been adjusted up again. They specifically say ABC is mostly affected positively. EDIT: \/ I misread the article. I thought it said the corrected values were in ABC's favour. Mokinokaro fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Oct 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Exactly, their ratings were too high. Although, they also said that the differences were largely miniscule. Just have to wait until Monday to see if it's a big enough of a difference for it to matter to us, and not just advertising companies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
The Red Queen posted:!!!! Its long past time we abandoned the Nielson system anyway
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
hangedman1984 posted:Its long past time we abandoned the Nielson system anyway Agreed, Instead of journalling things, with all the connected TV boxes, they should just be pulling data from what people are watching when, and what they're DVRing anyways. No need to be a Nielson family, larger pool of data, more accurate and honest reporting, AND MAYBE FOX WOULD STOP loving CANNING PERFECTLY GOOD SHOWS ALL THE loving TIME.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Isn't this the age where everybody is super paranoid about privacy and would hate having the data on what they're watching collected? I mean, I would think cable companies could do this easily anonymously, but people would be mad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
greatn posted:Isn't this the age where everybody is super paranoid about privacy and would hate having the data on what they're watching collected? I mean, I would think cable companies could do this easily anonymously, but people would be mad. Pretty easy thing to do. Make it opt-in like paperless billing and give you a small discount for agreeing to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
The problem with using an internet styled "just count the views" thing is that it doesn't account for demographics at all. At least not the way TVs are currently set up. The only way it could work is, if in the opt in process, you had to create profiles for each potential viewer in the household that had their age and sex, and then you would have to find a way to make it so that each person could be ID'd when they start switching channels/turn the TV on. That could be some kind of thing they press to quickly "log in" or something like that. The raw numbers alone aren't that helpful because they need to know who that ad space is going to be valuable for. A car company isn't going to want to pay big bucks for ad space on a show that only kids watch. A toy company that makes action figures isn't going to be interested in spending money during a show aimed at women, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
greatn posted:Isn't this the age where everybody is super paranoid about privacy and would hate having the data on what they're watching collected? I mean, I would think cable companies could do this easily anonymously, but people would be mad. The average person doesn't really care about privacy, and doesn't mind giving out small bits of information, in order to make their lives easier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Oasx posted:The average person doesn't really care about privacy, and doesn't mind giving out small bits of information, in order to make their lives easier. I certainly don't, just every time a company wants to do something the internet goes crazy. I mean, Facebook just added anonymous profiles because a couple thousand people signed up for a flash in the pan competitor in protest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
This episode was great and this whole season has been great. The new characters are good and except for Trainspotting the actors are doing well too. Best of all it's only Coulson, Skye and Fitz that I reckon have plot armour.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:Well, that leads to my other question: why do fans of SHIELD, the Inhumans, or the MCU in general think this would be a good idea, exactly? If Inhumans are introduced as a concept independently of Attilan or the classic Royal Family characters, wouldn't that only serve to dilute the significance of the latter when they're introduced? And on the SHIELD end of things, wouldn't it make for absolutely terrible storytelling to introduce a mysterious race of beings whose origins and motivations can't really be explained at all for at least another three years (since there's no room in Marvel's release slate for an Inhumans film until 2017)? The whole Skye 084 thing has already been dragged out enough since the reveal halfway through S1, frankly.* I know the Queen of England exists but I will probably never meet her. But I have met several people from the UK. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Pwnstar posted:Ok so I have a comic nerd question. Spider-Man was bitten by a radioactive spider/Bruce Banner was bombarded with gamma rays and their DNA was altered. I assume this makes them mutants but I guess X-Men are capital letter Mutants because they were born that way, just like Lady Gaga? Is there an actual difference or is it just about who can stay in which clubhouse? If you have the X-gene, you're a mutant. If you get your powers some other way, you're a mutate. Huge difference, bro, huge difference.  Inhumans are like mutants in that the Inhuman gene is hereditary like the X-gene, but Terrigen is pretty rare so outside of a huge aerosol bomb being exploded in the atmosphere most people not aware of that part of their ancestry will never know. Anyway, this show will be cancelled when Disney decides it doesn't like money anymore. CAPT. Rainbowbeard fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Oct 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Quote is not Edit. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
greatn posted:I certainly don't, just every time a company wants to do something the internet goes crazy. I mean, Facebook just added anonymous profiles because a couple thousand people signed up for a flash in the pan competitor in protest. I bet if Nielsen just tossed the self-reporting mechanism and used cameras with face recognition, enough people would still do it for free cable that it'd be worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
I want them constantly making GBS threads on Trainspotting to be a recurring gag. And shooting him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:The problem with using an internet styled "just count the views" thing is that it doesn't account for demographics at all. At least not the way TVs are currently set up. The only way it could work is, if in the opt in process, you had to create profiles for each potential viewer in the household that had their age and sex, and then you would have to find a way to make it so that each person could be ID'd when they start switching channels/turn the TV on. That could be some kind of thing they press to quickly "log in" or something like that. Actually, if you have a Kinect it can totally count people and estimate things like gender and age pretty accurately. Microsoft has a patent on using this for billing on streaming film, but they've never implemented it because the internet found out and pointed out how creepy it'd be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Republican Vampire posted:Actually, if you have a Kinect it can totally count people and estimate things like gender and age pretty accurately. Microsoft has a patent on using this for billing on streaming film, but they've never implemented it because the internet found out and pointed out how creepy it'd be. Counting how many people are in the room is different than getting demographic info for them. And considering the backlash against the Kinect 2.0, I doubt anyone would try to implement anything like that any time soon. It would really only need to be as complicated as an app that tagged you to your box/smartTV/device, or to join a "party" for group views. That way they get their demo info, and no new crazy hardware needs to be developed since tons of things already support apps. It's just apps connecting with each other and people tagging themselves as watching a device when its on. It would be no different than the journals, other than you don't need people to submit anything and they don't need to sit down and write anything. Since it is completely digital you could have way more people participating as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Counting how many people are in the room is different than getting demographic info for them. And considering the backlash against the Kinect 2.0, I doubt anyone would try to implement anything like that any time soon. It's not just counting. The software could estimate age based on stuff like nasolabial folds and looking for wrinkles. I'm not sure if they ever got it to be good at guessing gender tho. Granted, it sounds pretty imperfect, but... I think the bigger issue is that the two main US cable companies (Comcast and Warner) also each own shitloads of channels. In something like ratings where there is a lot of gray area, I think that it's hardly beyond the pale to think that they might skew the numbers a bit, and that kind of conflict of interest ought to set off alarm bells for advertisers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Republican Vampire posted:It's not just counting. The software could estimate age based on stuff like nasolabial folds and looking for wrinkles. I'm not sure if they ever got it to be good at guessing gender tho. Granted, it sounds pretty imperfect, but... Doesnt the kinect 2.0 consistantly try to sign peoples lamps and pets into the Xbox because its shonky as gently caress? I'm not doubting they SAID it could count the people in the room and estimate demographics, but personally I think the reasons they've never tried to impliment it as a factor in billing for movies is 1) fear of backlash, 2) people would just unplug the camera or use a different movie provider if the number of people in the room would make their movie more expensive and 3) it doesnt work very well with groups, missing people and seeing phantom people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 10:02
|
|
|
Republican Vampire posted:It's not just counting. The software could estimate age based on stuff like nasolabial folds and looking for wrinkles. I'm not sure if they ever got it to be good at guessing gender tho. Granted, it sounds pretty imperfect, but... The kinect 2.0 mistakes lamps, pillows and cats as people. I wouldn't count on it for accurate ratings data.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
If I learned anything from Paranormal Activity 4, it's that the Kinect makes for an excellent form of demon detection technology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 10:53
|
|
|
SiKboy posted:Doesnt the kinect 2.0 consistantly try to sign peoples lamps and pets into the Xbox because its shonky as gently caress? I'm not doubting they SAID it could count the people in the room and estimate demographics, but personally I think the reasons they've never tried to impliment it as a factor in billing for movies is 1) fear of backlash, 2) people would just unplug the camera or use a different movie provider if the number of people in the room would make their movie more expensive and 3) it doesnt work very well with groups, missing people and seeing phantom people. No, it's never tried to sign any of my lamps or pets in, but one time, my uncle (who works at Nintendo) told me some things about Microsoft you should all take as God's honest truth about the Xbone. Never try it out, he said, and get all your Microsoft info directly from Sony/PC Gamers (master race). Although, my cat likes to position himself between me and the Kinect sensor in such a way that the Kinect thinks that I am trying to use gesture controls as he wiggles his tail. My cat happens to be a rear end in a top hat and shouldn't be on the coffee table anyway. Seriously though, the first two possible reasons you listed there probably have something to do with it. The third, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
This episode has been gold so far 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
May being forced to smile is p great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:This episode has been gold so far Yup. I never thought it was bad when others did but it's definitely turned a corner and become legit good now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
This episode gets amazing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
It's such an easy joke, but everyone being genuinely concerned over hearing May laughing delighted me so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
At least Adrian Pasdar has a real mustache this season.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Yo
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Hahahaha "We're modern." I'm loving Ming-Na Wen so much right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:It's such an easy joke, but everyone being genuinely concerned over hearing May laughing delighted me so much. Seriously- at first, I thought it was going to be awkward, but then.. "..he's your husband?" "We're modern."
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
"I think he's still pissed we kidnapped him that time."
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Got Ocean's 12 this poo poo hahahaha
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
May is just killing this episode, goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
HYDRA. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:17
|
|