Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Some Lovely Concept Images From Titan Books' THE ART OF ASSASSIN'S CREED III!!


Our friends over at the always awesome Titan Books have a new title hitting shelves this week - THE ART OF ASSASSINS CREED III, released in conjunction with Ubisoft's spectacular new game (which arrived yesterday).  

My teenage son disappeared into his room last night to play AC3, which looks pretty amazing.  He played for hours, but all I could hear was him chatting via XBOX Live about yesterday's STAR WARS announcement.  I'm so proud of him - he's such a good Geek.  

Titan sent over a few art samples from their book - developmental material which is rather stunning in itself, regardless of how well adapted these designs are within the actual game.  Love this stuff (although I'm not so sure about that portrait...) 

Know ye that all images herein are EMBIGGENABLE, and that Titan's ART OF ASSASSIN'S CREED III can now be found HERE!  (NOTE that Sandy fallout may impact delivery times/immediate availability) 






Glen Oliver




Google +

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 31, 2012, 11:20 a.m. CST

    i'm in smosh's parody song for assassins creed 3

    by borbafett i know i know. no one cares.

  • I dig the gameplay but hate the ancient alien endings for this series.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 11:41 a.m. CST

    Creepy, haven't played the first 2..

    by paul burnett

    ..but tempted to get this. I dig sandbox style games, however Skyrim left me cold!! Just not a fan of that whole Lord Of The Rings vibe. Guess wht i'm asking is..Is AC3 "realistic" or is there "magic" and what not?

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 11:47 a.m. CST


    by NADO

    Be patient, the French Revolution happens after the American one..

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 12:48 p.m. CST

    Assassin's Creed III looks pretty cool.

    by F-18

    It almost makes me want to buy a Playstation 3 and I haven't avidly played video games in years.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Utterly un-special and dumb

    by kevred

    Video game storytelling is still so massively poor. Far and away the worst of any medium.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Love the AssCreed Franchise - and this looks effin awesome.

    by BeanGrud

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 1:24 p.m. CST

    ship battles are the best part

    by NotEnoughBiehn

    They actually require a bit of skill, unlike the rest of this series.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Loving it

    by donkey_lasher

    The first game was a breath of fresh air for video games, with a setting that had hardly been used. I'm glad Ubisoft have chosen historic ages that aren't usually used in games. The first was pretty good, the second was amazing, Brotherhood has the best city in the franchise and Revelations was the worst, but nicely tied up loose ends and was still very playable. And now I'm sat here with the latest. Going to load it up now on PS3 :)


  • Oct. 31, 2012, 3:02 p.m. CST


    by eric haislar

    Ever play the Uncharted series? Video game story telling at it's best. Characters you care about and amazing action set pieces that give most Hollywood blockbusters a run for there money.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 3:04 p.m. CST


    by eric haislar

    It has a very far fetched Sci Fi angle to it. But the stuff that deals with history is ace. You play as a person who can access the memories of there ancestors. so if you can get past that you will enjoy it.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 3:23 p.m. CST


    by paul burnett

    Thanks, gonna pick it up tomorrow. Do enjoy an explore and i've exhausted Red Dead Redemption.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 4:37 p.m. CST

    AC Series is magnifico! Need to update Thief franchise next!

    by ChakaMudd

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 5:36 p.m. CST AC....?

    by groorgman

    Still about some bullshit DNA rewriting history garbage? Or is it finally, just an assassin in his own time doing his own thing? Why couldn't the first one be that simple?

  • that videogames do have excellent stories, especially the ones made in the golden age of adventurers and rpgs. and i provided you with examples of modern videogames which also have great stories. so shut it boy and leave us the gamers enjoy our games and their stories.

  • because it is visually unimpressive and frankly one of the appeals of the series was its european aura. i will probably play the game as a pirated copy but i dont intend to buy it.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 7:15 p.m. CST

    People complaining about the setting?

    by kesoze4

    Seriously? This might be the most visually impressive game I've ever seen on a console. Unbelievable.

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 8:20 p.m. CST

    picking this up for PC the 20th

    by james

    Heard the parkour and the combat was simplified even further and the story kinda wonks in the 3rd act (subjective. grain of salt and all that). I've also heard it tells a rather grand, if simple adventure yarn and it stunning in its graphical fidelity, though plagued by bugs (patches are the name of the game these days anyways so that's not much of a concern. As someone wasting buckets of money on a history degree, it comes as no surprise the setting is my strongest draw. Loved the fun this series has had with period settings and some of the more colourful individuals from mosaic of world history. I"ve also heard it's even better stoned. Cheers

  • Oct. 31, 2012, 10:45 p.m. CST

    Why video games story telling can be better than ALL mediums

    by SlickyVonBoner

    Because good games are 3 dimensional and let the player choose 1 of multiple outcomes. Also you are actually participating in the story making it much more engrossing, where as in movies or books you are on the sidelines watching it all happen. For example, Knight of the Old Republic PC game has a much better story than most Star Wars books and the Prequels combined. Other recent games with a great story Bioshock, Red Dead Redemption.. and the list goes on. So suck it haters and go back to playing Bejeweled if that's all you know.

  • RDR is one of my favorite games of all time. I beat it long ago, but still play it from time to time. It's like time travelling back in time and escaping the modern world. I'm so familiar with the world. It's like returning to an old friend.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 6:18 a.m. CST


    by KGB3317

    I agree. Red Dead was an (almost) perfect game. Even the soundtrack is Oscar-worthy. ("Redemption in Dub" and "Gunplay" are two awesome songs, available on iTunes). I would love to see either a samurai game in Ancient Japan or a Viking game, both open-world. The worlds that half-resemble our own are the best.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 7:30 a.m. CST


    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

    The ancient alien angle explains the superhuman abilities (no one could climb that fast, or survive those falls), and neatly interweaves masonic conspiracy and mythology into the slant-history. Also, Desmond exploring his genetic memory via VR explains away the ability to respawn after getting killed, and gives a rationale for invisible walls in a sandbox game, which no game ever attempted, which was/is massively clever. Except for when we get to Desmond, in the series.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Best Assassins Creed so far. Part 3 is awesome.

    by MariusXe

    I never cared that much for the series (apart from part 2 which was also great), but this part is on par with Red Dead Redemption.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 2:24 p.m. CST

    The best video game stories...

    by Andrew Coleman

    Only seem amazing because they are video games. Red Dead Redemption is an amazing game... The story is stuff we've seen from Westerns fifty years ago. Stop with this "The stories are so good!" bull shit. They are good because you are playing them so they connect with you. It's social networking. Especially when we live in the age of jealousy where there are millions of people online with no talent angry at those who do have it. Video games play into this because they allow you to be in the story. So of course you guys think they are better you are involved.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:25 p.m. CST

    Art. Assassin's Creed. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    by Nintendarth

    Are games art? Let’s hope not. Gamers have fits of Internet rage when non-gamers attack the video game industry. Roger Ebert has spoken out against the idea that games can be an art form. Most gamers will tell you that Ebert doesn’t know what he’s talking about. But what if he does? What if he’s right? What if games actually aren’t “art” at all? Don’t panic. Back away from the ledge. Here are five good reasons why it doesn’t matter whether or not games are art. 1. Art is bullshit Recently I was at the MOMA in New York, viewing highly touted modern art. Most of it was crap. The only thing that made it “art” was that a museum hung it on a wall and said, “This means something.” I started watching the people more than the art itself and seeing the confused looks on their faces that said, “I don’t get it.” Yet, they nodded, showed mild appreciation with a smile, and leaned in as if a closer look would provide clarity. The truth is that most people want to be told what is and what is not art rather than make that determination for themselves. Art of this nature is often defined for the consumer, not by the consumer. Which means most art is manufactured as art. It’s not organic. It’s bullshit. White Painting by Robert Rauschenberg I don't get it. It doesn’t stop at art in a museum. I enjoyed the Oscar-winning movie The Artist, but many people spoke highly of it only because it was a movie you were supposed to speak highly of (it’s a silent film released in 2011 — how daring!). “I guess I’m just not smart enough for this movie,” someone told me after seeing it. The movie itself isn’t questioned — it’s already been deemed an artistic endeavor, after all — so the viewer questions herself. If you don’t get it, well, you must be stupid. The idea of “art” itself is corrupted, because the public — the consumer — isn’t determining what is and is not artistic. It’s the industries themselves and the media making those decisions for the populace. We risk that same level of corruption of integrity if we stress that games must meet similar artistic standards that we see in museums, in theaters, and in novels. 2. Games go beyond “art” The hang-up on games being labeled as art (or even potentially being art) is foolish. It attempts to tie games to a standard similar to other mediums. But games aren’t like those other forms of entertainment. Games are interactive. You don’t just read or watch a role played out for you; you become that role. In a game, you have constant influence on what’s happening. Even the most linear of games is still altered by when you choose to jump. Fall and die, and the narrative evolves, even if that evolution is merely restarting at a previous checkpoint. Gamers worry that if what they play isn’t recognized as an art form, it loses validity. That’s a very limited view of what video games offer. Games are something new, something that can’t be so easily defined as “art” or even as pure entertainment. Emotions are elicited in a whole new way with games so that even something as basic as Pong can cause a more visceral reaction than just about anything shown in the New York MOMA. Don’t confine a whole new way to experience and think about the world to old concepts. Games are something new, something different. 3. Sports don’t need to be art Fourth quarter, time winding down, fourth and long with one last shot at the end zone — this is about as tense a moment as you get in football. It’s not art, though, is it? And yet millions watch football each Sunday, unconcerned with what Roger Ebert or anyone else thinks of what they enjoy. Sports thrill us, engage us, dominate our lives, and connect us as a society. It’s not art by any traditional definition, but that doesn’t make it any less valid of a way to spend a Sunday. I’d argue that sports bring a unique narrative. The drama isn’t just about who wins, but who has a grudge against whom. Doesn’t it matter a little more when Peyton Manning faces Eli Manning on the gridiron? Sports fans know who talked smack about whom, who has a history of blowing it at the end of games, who is overpaid, who’s a cheap player, etc. That’s part of the drama of sports. In the proper context, it’s as intriguing as a Hollywood plot, but no one worries about whether or not it’s art. It’s sports. It’s different, right? Well, so are games. They entertain, inform, move us in unique ways — but they are something different than what we’ve usually labeled as works of art. Draw Something True gaming art. 4. For the people Games are for the working class. Yes, fat cats can enjoy games, too, but the core of gaming is designed for people who work hard, don’t make a ton of cash, and need to disappear from the world for a little while at the end of the day. Though it takes hundreds of people and millions of dollars to make some of the top titles in the industry, it’s the average Jane and Joe struggling to make a living who keep the games biz thriving. The “games as art” debate is merely a cry for legitimacy. It’s as if we need non-gamers to see games as some evolved form of entertainment in order for it to be OK for us to enjoy them. Let snobs be snobs and have their lives of snobbery. Games are for us — the common person. We don’t need validation to make video games “legitimate” in any way. Heck, we should despise such accreditation from people who seriously don’t have a clue about this form of entertainment. Games are ours, not theirs. We need to keep it that way. Being labeled as “art” takes away some of the subculture of gaming that is still vital to its long-term survival. 5. Who cares? Does it matter if games are art? If games were recognized as being equal to an Oscar winner or the National Book of the Year, would you experience them differently? It shouldn’t even matter if other people love a game you love. If you think Limbo’s dark dream world is the most incredible thing you’ve ever seen in a game, it shouldn’t matter if your friend thought it was dumb. It certainly shouldn’t matter what a bunch of non-gamers think about anything in gaming. Pity them for not being able to enjoy the things games have to offer — true immersion, social connection, and emotional gratification. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks about games. It doesn’t matter how others categorize games. What matters is how you experience, enjoy, and share games with others in the gaming community. 5 Good Reasons is a GamesBeat opinion series from Hilary Goldstein. Each month, he takes a controversial stance on a topic important to gamers. Goldstein writes about video games for a living. The former editor-in-chief of, he is currently a freelance writer and games consultant. His work has appeared in OXM, GamesRadar, IGN, and GameSpot among others. Even Swamp Creatures Get the Blues collects his short fiction work and is available on Follow Goldstein on Twitter @hilgoldstein. Read more at

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:29 p.m. CST

    Video games can never be art - PULITZER PRIZE WINNER Roger Ebert

    by Nintendarth

    Roger Ebert's Journal Video games can never be art By Roger Ebert on April 16, 2010 9:50 PM | 4936 Comments videogame.jpgHaving once made the statement above, I have declined all opportunities to enlarge upon it or defend it. That seemed to be a fool's errand, especially given the volume of messages I receive urging me to play this game or that and recant the error of my ways. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that in principle, video games cannot be art. Perhaps it is foolish of me to say "never," because never, as Rick Wakeman informs us, is a long, long time. Let me just say that no video gamer now living will survive long enough to experience the medium as an art form. What stirs me to return to the subject? I was urged by a reader, Mark Johns, to consider a video of a TED talk given at USC by Kellee Santiago, a designer and producer of video games. I did so. I warmed to Santiago immediately. She is bright, confident, persuasive. But she is mistaken. I propose to take an unfair advantage. She spoke extemporaneously. I have the luxury of responding after consideration. If you want to follow along, I urge you to watch her talk, which is embedded below. It's only 15 minutes long, and she makes the time pass quickly. cave_painting_l.jpg She begins by saying video games "already ARE art." Yet she concedes that I was correct when I wrote, "No one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great poets, filmmakers, novelists and poets." To which I could have added painters, composers, and so on, but my point is clear. Then she shows a slide of a prehistoric cave painting, calling it "kind of chicken scratches on walls," and contrasts it with Michelangelo's ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Her point is that while video games may be closer to the chicken scratch end of the spectrum, I am foolish to assume they will not evolve. She then says speech began as a form of warning, and writing as a form of bookkeeping, but they evolved into storytelling and song. Actually, speech probably evolved into a form of storytelling and song long before writing was developed. And cave paintings were a form of storytelling, perhaps of religion, and certainly of the creation of beauty from those chicken-scratches Werner Herzog is even now filming in 3-D. cavePainting1.jpg Herzog believes, in fact, that the paintings on the wall of the Cave of Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc in Southern France should only be looked at in the context of the shadows cast on those dark walls by the fires built behind the artists, which suggests the cave paintings, their materials of charcoal and ochre and all that went into them were the fruition of a long gestation, not the beginning of something--and that the artists were enormously gifted. They were great artists at that time, geniuses with nothing to build on, and were not in the process of becoming Michelangelo or anyone else. Any gifted artist will tell you how much he admires the "line" of those prehistoric drawers in the dark, and with what economy and wit they evoked the animals they lived among. Santiago concedes that chess, football, baseball and even mah jong cannot be art, however elegant their rules. I agree. But of course that depends on the definition of art. She says the most articulate definition of art she's found is the one in Wikipedia: "Art is the process of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions." This is an intriguing definition, although as a chess player I might argue that my game fits the definition. lascaux.jpg Plato, via Aristotle, believed art should be defined as the imitation of nature. Seneca and Cicero essentially agreed. Wikipedia believes "Games are distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas...Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction." But we could play all day with definitions, and find exceptions to every one. For example, I tend to think of art as usually the creation of one artist. Yet a cathedral is the work of many, and is it not art? One could think of it as countless individual works of art unified by a common purpose. Is not a tribal dance an artwork, yet the collaboration of a community? Yes, but it reflects the work of individual choreographers. Everybody didn't start dancing all at once. cave_painting_bison.jpg One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them. She quotes Robert McKee's definition of good writing as "being motivated by a desire to touch the audience." This is not a useful definition, because a great deal of bad writing is also motivated by the same desire. I might argue that the novels of Cormac McCarthy are so motivated, and Nicholas Sparks would argue that his novels are so motivated. But when I say McCarthy is "better" than Sparks and that his novels are artworks, that is a subjective judgment, made on the basis of my taste (which I would argue is better than the taste of anyone who prefers Sparks). wacoSTILL1.jpg Santiago now phrases this in her terms: "Art is a way of communicating ideas to an audience in a way that the audience finds engaging." Yet what ideas are contained in Stravinsky, Picasso, "Night of the Hunter," "Persona," "Waiting for Godot," "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock?" Oh, you can perform an exegesis or a paraphrase, but then you are creating your own art object from the materials at hand. Kellee Santiago has arrived at this point lacking a convincing definition of art. But is Plato's any better? Does art grow better the more it imitates nature? My notion is that it grows better the more it improves or alters nature through an passage through what we might call the artist's soul, or vision. Countless artists have drawn countless nudes. They are all working from nature. Some of there paintings are masterpieces, most are very bad indeed. How do we tell the difference? We know. It is a matter, yes, of taste. WACO_STILL2.jpg Santiago now supplies samples of a video game named "Waco Resurrection" (above), in which the player, as David Koresh, defends his Branch Davidian compound against FBI agents. The graphics show the protagonist exchanging gunfire with agents according to the rules of the game. Although the player must don a Koresh mask and inspire his followers to play, the game looks from her samples like one more brainless shooting-gallery. "Waco Resurrection" may indeed be a great game, but as potential art it still hasn't reached the level of chicken scratches, She defends the game not as a record of what happened at Waco, but "as how we feel happened in our culture and society." Having seen the 1997 documentary "Waco: The Rules of Engagement," I would in contrast award the game a Fail in this category. The documentary made an enormous appeal to my senses and emotions, although I am not proposing it as art. braid.jpg Her next example is a game named "Braid" (above). This is a game "that explores our own relationship with our encounter enemies and collect puzzle pieces, but there's one key can't die." You can go back in time and correct your mistakes. In chess, this is known as taking back a move, and negates the whole discipline of the game. Nor am I persuaded that I can learn about my own past by taking back my mistakes in a video game. She also admires a story told between the games levels, which exhibits prose on the level of a wordy fortune cookie. Level-1-Stills-0026.jpg We come to Example 3, "Flower" (above). A run-down city apartment has a single flower on the sill, which leads the player into a natural landscape. The game is "about trying to find a balance between elements of urban and the natural." Nothing she shows from this game seemed of more than decorative interest on the level of a greeting card. Is the game scored? She doesn't say. Do you win if you're the first to find the balance between the urban and the natural? Can you control the flower? Does the game know what the ideal balance is? These three are just a small selection of games, she says, "that crossed that boundary into artistic expression." IMHO, that boundary remains resolutely uncrossed. "Braid" has had a "great market impact," she says, and "was the top-downloaded game on XBox Live Arcade." All of these games have received "critical acclaim." 59666-050-05A1393B.jpg Now she shows stills from early silent films such as George Melies' "A Voyage to the Moon" (1902), which were "equally simplistic." Obviously, I'm hopelessly handicapped because of my love of cinema, but Melies seems to me vastly more advanced than her three modern video games. He has limited technical resources, but superior artistry and imagination. These days, she says, "grown-up gamers" hope for games that reach higher levels of "joy, or of ecstasy....catharsis." These games (which she believes are already being made) "are being rewarded by audiences by high sales figures." The only way I could experience joy or ecstasy from her games would be through profit participation. The three games she chooses as examples do not raise my hopes for a video game that will deserve my attention long enough to play it. They are, I regret to say, pathetic. I repeat: "No one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great poets, filmmakers, novelists and poets." bobby-fischer-en-1971.jpg Why are gamers so intensely concerned, anyway, that games be defined as art? Bobby Fischer, Michael Jordan and Dick Butkus never said they thought their games were an art form. Nor did Shi Hua Chen, winner of the $500,000 World Series of Mah Jong in 2009. Why aren't gamers content to play their games and simply enjoy themselves? They have my blessing, not that they care. Do they require validation? In defending their gaming against parents, spouses, children, partners, co-workers or other critics, do they want to be able to look up from the screen and explain, "I'm studying a great form of art?" Then let them say it, if it makes them happy. I allow Sangtiago the last word. Toward the end of her presentation, she shows a visual with six circles, which represent, I gather, the components now forming for her brave new world of video games as art. The circles are labeled: Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management. I rest my case.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:30 p.m. CST

    Brian Moriarty is with Ebert: Video Games Aren't True Art

    by Nintendarth

    Brian Moriarty Is with Ebert: Video Games Aren't True Art Posted by Sam_Osborn on Tuesday, Mar 22, 2011 Save this post Moriarty_2007_pic_large Full-bleed-1278088474_large Gtaiv_large Next Prev 1 2 3 More Sharing ServicesAdd This The war waged between Roger Ebert and the world’s gaming public over the “video games as art” claim reached a tenuous ceasefire last July when the ornery, venerable film critic posted the article “Okay, kids, play on my lawn.”. Though not a retreat from his “Video games can never be art” stance, the article ended with a grace note that satisfied gamers the world over: “I was a fool for mentioning video games in the first place.” The gaming collective left the argument at that, embraced the ambitions of Jane McGonigal,, and left Ebert to his movies. Enter Brian Moriarty, veteran game designer and lecturer at the GDC 2011 presentation of An Apology for Roger Ebert, in which Moriarty announced himself as the industry’s first defector to Ebert’s side. “Video game products contain plenty of art, but it’s product art, which is to say, kitsch art,” explains Moriarty about midway through his lecture. His speech up until this point has trudged through the obligatory semantics of the question “What is capital-A Art, anyway?” The answer, he claims, is tougher than the average consumer can handle. We require experts to tell us when something can be considered Art. “Certain people make it their business to exercise taste. These people are called (pinkies up) connoisseurs. Such an expert is Roger Ebert.” And even Ebert doesn’t believe many movies are worthy of the Art label, either. They’re products of industry, where capitalistic needs take priority over artistic integrity. The same goes for “Broadway musicals, theme parks, casinos, rock stars, major league sports, cable news. All media driven by advertising,” Moriarty argues, “devolves into kitsch.” And given the enormity of the gaming industry, the same can be said of video games. “Kitsch art is not bad art,” he says. “It’s commercial art. Art designed to be sold, easily and in quantity. And the bigger the audience, the kitschier it’s gonna get. Kitsch is a risk-reduction strategy, time-tested and good for business.” The opposite of kitsch, or maybe its more refined older brother, is “sublime art.” “Sublime art is fragile,” Moriarty gushes. “It lives or dies in the details. There’s nothing superfluous or out of place.” His definition of sublime art more or less stops there. Moriarty offers up no examples of these mighty and elusive works. Possibly because he would be hard-pressed to find a work of art that didn’t pose a financial risk or offer a tangible reward to its creator. Those revered works of literature, the canvases hung in museums, they were not all commissioned au gratis, free from the intentions of the market. So Moriarty turns to Ebert’s predecessor in history’s line of crotchety naysayers, Arthur Schopenhauer. A 19th century lecturer at the University of Berlin, Schopenhauer contended that “the essence of the universe is Being: a blind, irrational, unquenchable thirst to exist he called Wille zum Leben, and that everything we perceive is a representation of this Will to Live.” And since we “are products of Will,” Moriarty explains, “we spend most of our lives trapped in a cycle of striving and boredom.” All we can do to flee this cycle is “to contemplate sublime art,” he says. “Sublime art is the door to a perspective on reality that transcends Will. It is the still evocation of the inexpressible.” Playing video games, which is “an activity motivated by decisions, striving, goals and competition, a deliberate concentration of the force of will” is a direct contradiction to this idea of transcendence through contemplation. They are inherently designed to never achieve a level of artistic merit above kitsch. Roger Ebert, it seems, has made an ally.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:32 p.m. CST

    So, Merrick - how are your son's grades?

    by Nintendarth

    Does he have a lot of friends? I would imagine not since he apparently spends hours hidden in his room playing video games. What a fine job you've done as a parent.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:34 p.m. CST

    The amazing things a person can learn on X-Box Live.

    by Nintendarth

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:36 p.m. CST

    by Nintendarth

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:38 p.m. CST

    by Nintendarth

    Be proud.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:39 p.m. CST

    by Nintendarth

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:45 p.m. CST

    A comparison for you all. And a choice. Enjoy your Star Wars figures.

    by Nintendarth The Art of Assassin's Creed III [Hardcover] Andy McVittie (Author) Be the first to review this item List Price: $29.95 Price: $19.76 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details You Save: $10.19 (34%) or Help Provide Care To American Children in Need Every night there are American children who go to bed hungry. For millions it is the only life they know: hunger, fear, uncertainty about the future. Most are the children of America's working poor. These children, they need our help. Feed The Children is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization. Donations and contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by law. Fund Code: 5110-10 $20.00 helps feed 4 hungry children.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:53 p.m. CST

    by Nintendarth

    Star Wars Supreme Edition Stormtrooper Costume Stormtrooper in full effect Molded pieces? Check! Blaster rifle. Check! Shooting skills? Nope! Read more... $1,299.99 In stock , except: Standard Size ( Est. 1-3 weeks ) or Your choice.

  • Nov. 1, 2012, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Ass Creed 3 has been massive disappointment so far


  • Help support the homeless in your community The Following is a list of needed items. Please take what you can to any agency providing homeless services. This list is something the younsters in your Church or community organization as well as individuals can contribute to any time of the year. All of these items are in need year around. Your youth groups will have fun collecting these. The list was developed by a local service agency in my community: Sweetwater Valley Camp in Austell Ga. They provide a free food pantry (set up like a grocery store) a free clothing pantry (set up like a retail clothing store) a medical facility (including dental care) and many other services out of a beautifully well-maintained building. The list was developed in conjunction with Cobb Faith Partnership. Batteries (AAA, AA, D) Feminine hygiene products Blankets Utility/Emergency Candles Sleeping Bags FlashlightsMatches Bibles & bookmarks Underwear Zip-Lock bags Thick Socks Garbage bags Deodorant Tissues and/or Toilet paper Sewing kits Band-aids Toothbrushes and Toothpaste Tents or shelters Antibacterial Ointment Combs & brushes Small lanterns with batteries Coleman catalytic heaters Ready-to-eat food Bottled water Travel size soaps, shampoos Baby wipes or wet wipes Reading glasses

  • Nov. 2, 2012, 8:49 a.m. CST


    by TheMachinist

    STOP CONTRADICTING THE GENERAL CONSENSUS. Seriously though, I'm conflicted as to whether or not I should get the game. Any other opinions?

  • Nov. 2, 2012, 12:29 p.m. CST


    by paul burnett

    ..I was going to get it, but having realised that i've never been so undecided about a game (and the amount of dvds and tv i'm catching up on) i can't really be that bothered about it!! I think Red Dead Redemption set the bar so high in my mind, other games are suffering by comparisson.