Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#141

Post by conradfr »

ghoomketu wrote: post #22

Vue 3. It was highly anticipated but when it was initially announced everyone including HNers were up in arms about how it's going to kill Vue. I can't find the thread but I do remember it vaguely. Thankfully the release not only lived up to its hype (faster, smaller, easier) but also put to rest almost all objections about backward compatibility. I really think the Vue team did an awesome job with their next release…

Funny as yesterday I was thinking that since Vue 3 release I had not heard much about it.

My theory was that not having the router and vuex ready on day one had hindered the hype. Maybe I've been wrong.

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#142

Post by hiperlink »

justaman wrote: post #84
mtberatwork wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and become arguably the greatest basketball player of all time. LeBron is definitely the best of his era but he's not touching Jordan in terms of greatest player of all time, even if he does pull off two more championships. During the 90s, Jordan was as close to a demi-god in the sports world as you could get.

You can't compare the two. Look at each as individuals. They have each changed the game of basketball in their own way. There will never be a single "GOAT". Every generation builds on what the generation prior created. Dr. J -> MJ -> Lebron. All dominate players in their own era that made everyone around them, and after, better players.

Could You please elaborate on how LBJ changed the game? I think, currently Curry did with his shooting skills, and somewhat Harden too - tho I hate the step-back threes due to it should be called travelling at least one out of three times. LBJ: great skill-set, great athlete but changing the game?

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#144

Post by pengstrom »

Hype depends on who you interact with, but a few impressions:

I was really impressed with Jonathan Blow's The Witness. Exquisitely designed and thought out.

The animated series Primal by Genndy Tartakovsky. A pulpy cartoon without dialogue unlike anything else animated from the US.

The tv series Doom Patrol. Clever, revels in the absurd but still manages serious drama on what it means to not be completely human any more.

Philosophy in general. I've always seen it as academic wank, but i couldn't have been more wrong. It gives you the ability to step back in a way that pure science cannot. Excellent tool to learn about yourself too.

On a more controversial note, I was initially put off by critical race theory (talking explicitly about race in academia? Putting blame on the prosperous west?), but I must say it makes a lot of sense.

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#145

Post by SyzygistSix »

buggythebug wrote: post #112
neetrain wrote: post #18

How about Radiohead's 2007 album In Rainbows? Maybe OK Computer too, but I don't know how much hype there were because I was too young then...

Ehhh, Radiohead is very divisive. My music friends are very split with them. Half can't get off their knees praising them. The other half see them as bandwagon music. I think they're music is alright but I think most people dive into like it's the bible or something and you can't say anything bad about them.

>Half can't get off their knees praising them.

The other half see them as bandwagon music.

They are both right. OK Computer and Kid A deserve all their praise and more. They were like nothing else in popular music at the time. After those two records, they were rather bandwagonesque, although to their credit, they did create the bandwagon they have ridden on since then. Although the self-release they did for In Rainbows certainly changed the artist relationship with fans and media companies. How they released that album was far more the game changer than the content.

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#146

Post by vishnugupta »

SkyPuncher wrote: post #129

Tenet. Just watched it last night and found it to be absolutely incredibly well done. Dialogue audio was weirdly quiet, but that was solved by cranking the center channel up relative to other channels.

+1. However, the experience of watching in theatre was a bit painful because of the background music. It could be because of that particular theatre but man, if there was no subtitle there's no way in hell I could've followed the movie. I've pre-ordered it on Apple TV to understand all the layers.

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#147

Post by nevi-me »

soneca wrote: post #46

I saw contrarian opinions, but I believe Avengers: End Game pretty much delivered the insane hype cultivated for 10 years.

I second this. With so many movies in the epic, they'll still be fun to watch 30 years from now.

Vision really disappointed in the penultimate. I think his character was hyped up a lot in Age of Ultron. Became disappointing seeing him go so easily.

Older Thanos was a really well-thought and played villain. One which many people got to identify with (based on his goals in the movie). Captain America delivered when he proved worthy. I think Captain Marvel was an arrogant addition that needed to fill in pieces to the story, like how Stark and Nebula get saved.

It's going to be a classic series in the decades to come. Marvel delivered.

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#148

Post by ArtWomb »

holografix wrote: post #89

Zelda Breath of the Wild exceeded my expectations completely. I played it years after it came out and was gobsmacked by how good it was. A strange mixture of pleasant, mildly challenging, big and awe inspiring world.

Nintendo Direct streams constitute a master class in building hype ;)

Re: Ask HN: What Lived Up to the Hype?

#150

Post by [deleted] »

Veen wrote: post #44
Causality1 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can a movie be a fantastic movie if it requires background reading? That's a failure of storytelling.

I think Citizen Kane stands alone. It can be understood as an architypal "power and wealth corrupts" narrative. But our appreciation of art benefits from an understanding of its context and the history of the genre/medium. Citizen Kane may be more meaningful to you if you are aware of Hearst and the related social history in the same way that Wagner's music is wonderful in its own terms, but possibly richer and more…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN