Foamy is very popular, ok, but don't you think cashing in on that by making an inanimate "flash movie" which is, in effect, an mp3 audio speech with an image tacked to it and getting it shoved on the front page because it's foamy is pushing your luck a leeetle bit far?
I'm not a big fan of foamy overal. Good jokes every now and again non-withstanding I fail to see what is so funny about a high-pitched voice with an animate squirrel ranting on several subjects. Usually I just conclude this is because high-pitched voices swearing a lot is not in my humour-category, but when you make a basic non-cartoon of it you're pushing it a bit far for me.
While well-designed, not looking bad and not too hard to control, that game lacked any point. It's basically walking around talking to various characters. If you can figure out who you're supposed to talk to, you talk to him, if not you just talk to people until you reach the right person, but it's usually pretty easy to figure out
Not to complain or anything, but men having sex isn't exactly the sickest thing ever. On top of that, the graphics were pretty bad and the sound (voices) were just terrible. A bit more effort, please, don't go for the cheap "Sickest ever"-stuff
That was really good, overal, though variable. The animations were great and the music was fun, but I really don't get the connection here. Is the music suppose to fit the video? If not, why use that music? Was it about secondary game characters? Huh?
Ok, let's start on the graphics. They're really not that good. Smooth, yes, but they're little more than one-frame static ships that look like they were drawn in paint moving across the screen. Not only is that not really that well-animated, it's also extremely boring to look at.
I was most agitated by the bad plot, though. Not only does it make little sense and does it develop at a boring pace, your story seems to indicate that you were shooting for realism. Well you got exactly the opposite, this was pure bullshit.
The start was an immediate annoyance. China has a bunch of ICBMs capable of striking US soil. Yes, they wouldn't reach New York, but why in God's name would they send a lone bomberplane to bomb one city when they could level a significant portion of the West Coast? And do you seriously think one bomber plane, no matter with what kind of fighter support, could penetrate into US skies during times of war? That isn't a 9/11 scenario, buddy, that's a foreign fighter-plane going up during times of war, they get shot down pretty quick
And why in God's name did they invade North Korea? North Korea has the 5th-strongest standing army in the world! If they're already fighting Taiwan and the US, do you really think they'd actually invade this powerful neighbour, pissing off an enormous nearby military power that would strike back immediately, not to mention that it has a nuclear arsenal damn close to their own soil. Hell no, China would strike a deal with North Korea for South Korea if anything.
Beijing under seige? What is up with that? Do you really think the US could muster enough land forces to actually land on Chinese soil and lay seige to Beijing? Hell no! All the countries in the world combined could probably not muster enough numbers to do that, let alone the US alone. Speaking of allies, where's Russia in this? China's long-time neighbour and opponent would surely have a say in this, especially as China has hundreds of nuclear weapons capable of hitting Russia, as opposed to the few it could hit the US with. Russia would either side with the US or China and this choice would be rather significant, Russia being one of the biggest militaries in the world, so why's it not mentioned? Same goes for India?
And just a smaller note; military tripled in size in China? Heh, another bonuscard for cluelesness, huh? If only you had spared yourself the trouble to do two seconds of fact-finding you would've find that in case of war China has 206 million men they can draw on to fight, while their standing army is 2.2 million men. That's right, pretty much a hundred-fold, not three-fold.
Kharn
No Pokemon Allowed
All 44 flash Reviews
Rated 4 / 5 stars February 9, 2006
Horrible storyline
That's one weakly written storyline, man, and the dialogue is just horrible, really horrible.
Other than that, the style is good and the animations are fantastic.
Rated 3.5 / 5 stars February 6, 2006
Hah, good fun!
Nice concept, man, bit weak on the follow-through. The joke doesn't run well and the animations aren't all that, though they're nice enough.
Overall well done.
Rated 2.5 / 5 stars August 30, 2005
Ok, this is pushing the limits a little bit...
Foamy is very popular, ok, but don't you think cashing in on that by making an inanimate "flash movie" which is, in effect, an mp3 audio speech with an image tacked to it and getting it shoved on the front page because it's foamy is pushing your luck a leeetle bit far?
I'm not a big fan of foamy overal. Good jokes every now and again non-withstanding I fail to see what is so funny about a high-pitched voice with an animate squirrel ranting on several subjects. Usually I just conclude this is because high-pitched voices swearing a lot is not in my humour-category, but when you make a basic non-cartoon of it you're pushing it a bit far for me.
Failure in my book, with apologies
Rated 3 / 5 stars July 26, 2005
Not that good
While well-designed, not looking bad and not too hard to control, that game lacked any point. It's basically walking around talking to various characters. If you can figure out who you're supposed to talk to, you talk to him, if not you just talk to people until you reach the right person, but it's usually pretty easy to figure out
So what's the point?
Rated 2 / 5 stars July 13, 2005
So...how is this sick exactly?
Not to complain or anything, but men having sex isn't exactly the sickest thing ever. On top of that, the graphics were pretty bad and the sound (voices) were just terrible. A bit more effort, please, don't go for the cheap "Sickest ever"-stuff
Rated 0 / 5 stars July 13, 2005
What is this, world poverty day?
Newgrounds isn't exactly the place for this kind of thing, man.
Rated 4.5 / 5 stars July 10, 2005
Well done!
It looks surprisingly good, done simply but with style, and it plays incredibly well. Good job
Rated 4 / 5 stars June 29, 2005
I don't get it
That was really good, overal, though variable. The animations were great and the music was fun, but I really don't get the connection here. Is the music suppose to fit the video? If not, why use that music? Was it about secondary game characters? Huh?
Rated 3.5 / 5 stars April 15, 2005
Really not that good
Ok, let's start on the graphics. They're really not that good. Smooth, yes, but they're little more than one-frame static ships that look like they were drawn in paint moving across the screen. Not only is that not really that well-animated, it's also extremely boring to look at.
I was most agitated by the bad plot, though. Not only does it make little sense and does it develop at a boring pace, your story seems to indicate that you were shooting for realism. Well you got exactly the opposite, this was pure bullshit.
The start was an immediate annoyance. China has a bunch of ICBMs capable of striking US soil. Yes, they wouldn't reach New York, but why in God's name would they send a lone bomberplane to bomb one city when they could level a significant portion of the West Coast? And do you seriously think one bomber plane, no matter with what kind of fighter support, could penetrate into US skies during times of war? That isn't a 9/11 scenario, buddy, that's a foreign fighter-plane going up during times of war, they get shot down pretty quick
And why in God's name did they invade North Korea? North Korea has the 5th-strongest standing army in the world! If they're already fighting Taiwan and the US, do you really think they'd actually invade this powerful neighbour, pissing off an enormous nearby military power that would strike back immediately, not to mention that it has a nuclear arsenal damn close to their own soil. Hell no, China would strike a deal with North Korea for South Korea if anything.
Beijing under seige? What is up with that? Do you really think the US could muster enough land forces to actually land on Chinese soil and lay seige to Beijing? Hell no! All the countries in the world combined could probably not muster enough numbers to do that, let alone the US alone. Speaking of allies, where's Russia in this? China's long-time neighbour and opponent would surely have a say in this, especially as China has hundreds of nuclear weapons capable of hitting Russia, as opposed to the few it could hit the US with. Russia would either side with the US or China and this choice would be rather significant, Russia being one of the biggest militaries in the world, so why's it not mentioned? Same goes for India?
And just a smaller note; military tripled in size in China? Heh, another bonuscard for cluelesness, huh? If only you had spared yourself the trouble to do two seconds of fact-finding you would've find that in case of war China has 206 million men they can draw on to fight, while their standing army is 2.2 million men. That's right, pretty much a hundred-fold, not three-fold.
Rated 2.5 / 5 stars April 11, 2005
Oh great
Another Madness clone
Fantastic.