Smith: Now what? Things have changed. The market’s tough. I’m sure you can understand why our beloved parent company, Warner Brothers, has decided to make a sequel to the trilogy.
Neo: What?
Smith: They informed me they’re gonna to do it with or without us.
Neo: I thought they couldn’t do that?
Smith: Oh, they can, and they made it clear they would kill our contract if we didn’t cooperate.
The film itself explained pretty well why it exists and why it was how it was.
Just to provide context for those who didn’t watch Resurrections:
Neo is back in The Matrix as Thomas Anderson and is actually a video game developer and his claim to fame game is The Matrix. His business partner shows a lot of signs of being Smith “reborn”. They kind of lampshade that the people who own the rights to their game were going to make another one regardless of whether the creators were involved so it is up to them to either step aside or make the best of it.
Honestly? Resurrection has grown on me a lot, in large part because the credits sequence of all things recontextualizes the entire movie.
spoilerBasically, the first act of the movie is (re-)awakening Neo so all the marketing makes it feel like a reboot of 1. Except then it takes a pretty big shift as we find out that everyone who fought in the original wars is old and retired, if not dead. And The Machines want Zion to return as a power source except a faction of The Machines believed in Neo and fought, leading to basically the premise of the MMO where there are two big factions. One wants to return and the other wants to stay free. And a key part of The Matrix is that it requires a Neo and Trinity to provide just the right amount of rebellion (which is more power) but to torment them so that they can’t ever move on and have a happy ending. And the rest of the movie is basically The Kids rescuing Trinity and Neo and Trinity both having The One powers. Culminating in basically a repeat of the ending of 1 where they challenge The Machines and fly off into the distance. All while a fucking ska cover of Rage’s Wake Up plays. And… that is kind of what made me really like the movie even if I really fucking disliked watching it? Because… we (GenX/Millennials) fought our fight and… what did we accomplish? The world is a shitty place that gets shittier by the moment (exponentially in 2025…). We choose to go back to our cages because we are too afraid of the world outside of it and our lack of comforts. And that is what the movie was about. Humanity escaped The Matrix because of Neo… and Humanity went back in because the outside world is scary. And Neo and Trinity are going to have to fight our war again and maybe we’ll care this time but we probably won’t. Rage Against The Machine should have been the anthem of a generation and it mostly was ignored or loved by the machine de la Rocha et al were raging against. And… that is also the thing that gets too real. Because we have a generation that were inspired by what we did. But… what fucking kid even cares enough about Rage to want ska covers? Much like… what kids actually care enough about The Matrix to want a sequel? The sequel is still for the crowd that largely didn’t learn the message of the originals.
So yeah. I don’t LIKE Resurrections but I also kind of love that it exists? Even if… it existing makes me depressed?
I think that’s a pretty great summary. When it comes to unnecessary/years later sequels most are just garbage. I think Matrix 4 is still bad, but I have to give it credit for trying something interesting. It doesn’t work ultimately, but it tried something.
Resurrections was basically a parody of the original trilogy, along with the politics going on in the background of producing Resurrections. The Wachowskies didn’t want to do it at all, but ended up taking the reigns because WB would have made it without them, so they used the opportunity to basically shit all over WB and Hollywood and capitalism in general.
In that regard, it’s an awesome movie. If you expect more of the same kind of stuff from the originals, you will likely be disappointed.
Fishburne was very diplomatic when asked for his opinion on the finished Matrix 4: “it was better than I expected, but not as good as I had hoped”.
Hugo weaving, the actor for Smith, didn’t appear in the film due to alleged scheduling conflicts, but I suspect he took a look at the script and noped out of it.
This has to be it. I watched the RLM video where they say the same thing, then I watched the movie for myself and in the first five minutes of dialog when the new Smith says “our bosses at Warner Brothers” and I was just like “ooookay”
Didn’t he not even want to do Infinity War and Endgame, which were actually solid stories? I have a feeling he wants no part of The Matrix at this point.
A media franchise, also known as a multimedia franchise, is a collection of related media in which several derivative works have been produced from an original creative work of fiction, such as a film, a work of literature, a television program, or a video game. Bob Iger, chief executive of the Walt Disney Company, defined the word franchise as "something that creates value across multiple businesses and across multiple territories over a long period of time."[1]
My understanding is that’s deliberate. The Wacowskis were done with The Matrix, the original trilogy (+ Animatrix) was the complete package. But the powers that be demanded more to milk the franchise, and when the Wacowskis tried to push back, the higher-ups said they would do it with or without them. So the Wacowskis are deliberately sabotaging the sequels, and good on em.
The fourth movie was written by one of the Wachowskis as a metaphor for their own transition, as a creative outlet during a grieving period after the death of their parents.
As I recall them saying, they felt that way maybe in retrospect? They hadn’t transitioned in real life by then, so that’s getting pretty subconscious at that point. At the time, the metaphors that were clear were about dreams, the savior allegory, a sense of not mattering as a cog in the machine, and so forth.
I did. Its cynicism about making another Matrix movie is well-noted and some of the most fascinating things about that movie, but it’s also a protagonist swap between Neo and Trinity, which makes a ton of sense for the trans metaphor. It can be cynical about the realities of making the movie and still not be sabotage. And also it was only written by one of the two Wachowskis.
So then you still get to play them. The only people this affects are new buyers, which… scans internet will be approximately nobody, given the raging hate-boners on display. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Then you’ll play the DLC with the updated graphics etc. There’s nothing mystical about the upgrade pack - it’s just engine optimizations to let the game run natively on new hardware, probably some revamped textures, etc. The base game has been DLC-aware since the DLC was released. Having the DLC doesn’t change the game code, it just makes the extra content accessible.
Okay, so then it’s just like normal? This is no news at all? It’s the same as buying the game on the original Switch? Because the DLCs weren’t included with that version either. 🤷♂️ How uninteresting of a post.
When I hit 360 hours in BotW, I asked myself, was this worth a dollar an hour? Yes, yes it was. That was almost 8 years ago, and doesn’t take into account time spent playing other games, or the 7+ years of playtime since.
Different strokes for different folks. I’ve been playing MK8 for 9ish years on two systems. I don’t expect World to be a step backwards, but it could happen.
I may have bought a Switch at launch solely for BotW (even though I had a Wii U), but that’s not the only game I played, even if was the only game I owned for a bit. More games came later. Anyone saying “I’m only going to buy one game” is basing that off of what’s available at launch. More games will come later, at which point people will make their value decisions.
People are losing their shit about Nintendo bumping prices for the first time in several gaming generations. Broad declarations of “never, not me, I won’t!” There seems to be a large overlap between the most vocal and the following two groups:
Happy with your Steam Deck? Great! I’m glad another actual gaming company (Valve) has entered the hardware space. (For MS and Sony, gaming is just one part of their enormous portfolios.) Nintendo doesn’t interest Deck folks. That’s fine. I can’t play first person or close third person games, and never liked RTS-style click as fast as you can games, so PC gaming has never been my thing. The impressive Steam library doesn’t do much for me. That’s fine. We all have options. Great!
People that just pirate their shit? Great! Piracy always has and always will exist. Companies have always fought back against it, and always will. Getting around those barriers is part of the scene. Remember when Sony lost in court against Connectix, then bought VGS just to kill it? I do. I was an adult at the time, and played a lot of THPS using a shitty USB gamepad on my computer. The world kept turning. Games are still free for those that want them enough.
The thing those groups have in common? Neither of them were all that likely to buy anything Nintendo. But any unfavorable news makes them come out of the woodwork to declare that they’re not going to buy any of it even harder. Great! Just totally irrelevant. It’s the latest chapter in the long running saga of the console wars. It’s never been a good story, but does it ever have staying power. Yay tribalism.
$/h is a shitty metric. Some hours are more enjoyable than others, and also time is a resource we spend, just like money, not something we’re gaining, so it taking time is a negative. Enjoyment/$ is the metric to use, or maybe (enjoyment/h)/$.
$/h is a marketing term. It isn’t a term consumers should bother with. It’s what has lead to boring over-inflated games that waste your time doing things that don’t matter and aren’t fun.
Enjoyment/$ is the metric to use, or maybe (enjoyment/h)/$.
Or, as I stated, “worth the money.” I’m not interested in turning it into a hard formula, universally transferable. As you noted, there’s too many variables. I was stating that the money was well spent. That’s it.
I’m not at all defending the price, but am secretly hoping this outcry will make it easier for me to be an early adopter. I still don’t have a PS5 due to how burned I got trying to preorder one.
This isn’t even industry standard - charging $10 to “upgrade” a game, yes, but as far as I can remember the DLC is always included with the game at the base game price when it’s been out for a while.
I hope Nintendo’s extreme arrogance and greed bites them in the ass. Will probably have to wait a year or so after launch to know since I’m sure it will take that long to get Switch 2s to all the diehards with money to burn. I’ll be interested to see how it sells to everyone else.
Yes, they charged for it years ago on the last gen system. This type of rerelease usually includes the DLC in the package so that they can go back to charging full price for a game that’s no longer in the zeitgeist and not worth as much as a brand new game.
We’re only paying a measly $70 for the Switch 2 version. Just get a third job and be grateful for the opportunity to purchase the DLC at $20. Then you can use the last of your hundred dollar bill for that one tech demo game!
ign.com
Aktywne