Brasil

[quote name='Deathmonkey7']If by Half-Life 2 you mean the part where you're in Ravenholm then yeah.. that's really freaky.[/quote] I second that. First time I saw those howler mutants jumping on the rooftops, silhouetted against a moon-lit cloudy night sky, with those horrid, ghastly, moaning howls...*shudders* [URL=http://img157.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img157&image=obcaptioncontesthl2ravenholm6a.jpg][IMG]http://img157.exs.cx/img157/5599/obcaptioncontesthl2ravenholm6a.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

It came down to Kane vs Chaos, and Chaos came out on top. London raves r teh sexx.

[quote name='AzureWolf']I'm sorry to say, Siren, but I think he was supporting my point, not your increasingly flawed side.[/quote]By "increasingly flawed side" you mean my argument that the knife is much more useful in combat than the useless dud of a box/barrel-cutter that you're making it out to be? My argument which is the exact same stance taken by nearly every other person in this thread? The exact same stance taken by pretty much every review of RE4 that I've read? Sure...nice cheap shot there, AW, because that's all it is. [quote]I never meant you wouldn't have to reload in combat, and as Jonexe pointed out, dropping your enemy is the time to reload. A standing enemy denotes one that is on his two feet (or his two - or four - whatever). However, this does not immediately mean that an enemy that is not standing is dead. I think you aren't shooting them or fighting them properly if you never knew that you can drop them before they die. But you can, provided you make good/smart shots (i.e., efficient use of ammo).[/quote]And again, the knife can give you breathing room quite well (in some situations, moreso than your precious Shotgun), [i]provided you know how to use it[/i]--and I think you just don't know how to use it. What is this thinking I don't know how to drop an enemy to their knees? I'm sure I missed that potential, what with the free aim and full articulation for the target zones. And where in my posts did I ever explicitly or implicitly say that? You're trying to extract something from my posts that simply isn't there, AW. Again, nice cheap shot. [quote]Before my figure of speech (i.e., middle of a fight), I stated "crucial points" and "monsters standing." I admit, I shouldn't have used the figure of speech if it wasn't clear what I meant beforehand. So, I will clearly state my side now: you can create an opening to reload (if you need to) more effectively and faster with smart gunshooting than with the very dispensible knife.[/quote]Again, there's this "if you need to" phrasing in your post. You will always need to reload, and it's not only limited to out-of-combat situations. And as far as the game is concerned (and I'd say it very strongly emphasizes this) when there are enemies present in any position, you are still in combat. If you don't believe me, examine how effective the weapons are. Most of the time, they have KD power. Only a few weapons in the game will get 1-hit-kills (and the Shotgun needs to be up-close with a headshot for this to work) and even then, they have very particular situations where you can down an enemy in one shot. When you drop even a group of five to their knees (perfect example of this being the first few areas in the Castle, particularly after you run into Luis), the first will be getting up as you cap the fifth in the knee. It's almost a perfect cycle. But the crucial point here is that enemies will still be coming at you, even after you knock the majority of the group down, and that is still a combat situation. AW, any time you need to reload when there are enemies present, whether grounded or coming at you with a weapon, is reloading in a combat situation. [quote]As for your accuracy, get over yourself. Jonexe pointed out that accuracy is just hitting the enemy, not shooting them in the best/smartest places. You sound like you use the knife alot, which, as useless as it is, is hard to miss with.[/quote]Get over myself? lol Oh, I'm sure I'm really praising my exceptional aim here, AW. Nice cheap shot. Seriously, though, I was simply making a statement that I have better-than-your-average-bear aiming in RE4 and I still used the knife, because it's a very effective melee weapon. [quote]Actually, it makes my point stronger. I had terrible aim, yet I was able to have more than enough ammo at every point in the game. So, if someone like me, with my terrible aim, is able to not need to reload at crucial points, and have more than enough ammo, then you, with your god-like capabilities, should be overwhelmed with ammo and supplies. And let's face facts: I've played through the entire game. I know every situation in the game, and I've been able to overcome those parts without the knife. Guess what? You can throw a million hypothetical situations, and make pointless conceptual thoughts, but the fact that I completed the game without needing the knife makes all that garbage moot. The knife is indispensible only because you can't throw it away, and it is in used in QTEs. Plus, you can use it to open boxes. But that's it. There's nothing else to the weapon, at least if you want to get through each battle as effortlessly as possible.[/quote][center][img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22511&stc=1[/img][/center] "god-like capabilities" Again, cheap shot. Nice little soapbox speech, too. By the way...just how good of an aim do you need to have to be able to do damage with the [i]Shotgun[/i]? The Shotgun can blast enemies down with two, maybe three shells, so I'd hardly think having excesses of ammunition throughout the game validates your side here. You're using a weapon that almost always guarantees some type of hit (usually a KD). I find it amusing that you have the gall to say I should get over myself, AW. After all, you [i]are[/i] the one running around with a veritable Spread weapon and thinking it somehow validates your assessment of the knife being useless. [quote]Very, very good point! ^^ My friend actually has this problem: overemphasizing the difficulty of RE4 because he doesn't shoot as well as his accuracy boasts (96%).[/QUOTE]Yes, I can see how the game is easy when you're using the Shotgun and nothing else. You sold your pistol early on and never bought another one. You've made no indication at all that you use anything other than the Shotgun-type weapons. I can see how the game wouldn't be a challenge for you then. If you use the Shotgun exclusively, too (which it seems that you do except for sniping, if you do snipe at all that is)...you're going to be running out of ammo very quickly. Even with the Shotgun's blast radius, if your accuracy is as bad as you say it is, you're going to be running out of ammo, but somehow, you don't? Beg your pardon, but I smell bull****. Just play the (whole) game without selling your pistol (and without resorting to flinging buckshot everywhere) and see how the dynamics change. You're running around with a cannon while the rest of us are using a handgun. You're not exactly gauging the game on any reasonable scale there. This isn't meant to insult you, either. It's just the truth. Only using the Shotgun is not going to give you an accurate indication of what RE4 is really like, and of course you're going to think the knife is useless, because you're not giving it a chance, because you're hyperfocused on blasting through the game at top speed, essentially. That's why your argument is faulty, AW, because you haven't been using the knife because you wrote it off early on. EDIT: You're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Why?

Isn't it obvious? Screw flight. Screw heat. Screw super strength. Hell, even screw ice powers. My super power of choice would be the ability to shoot Anti-Symantec Death Rays from my finger tips. It would be the best power ever. I could rid the world of the evil that is Symantec.

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm suggesting that the image doesn't really need the slanted bar. Just keep the horizontal one. When the horizontal and the diagonal one, all of those quarter, eigth and sixteenth notes are getting jumbled together.

[quote name='Jonexe]Get yourself a handgun with decent power, decent firing speed, and an ok reload time. Then aim at the knees. Yes, I know they're hard to hit; but if you aim down and pop off a couple shots, you can usually get a guy or two down to their knees, and then Suplex them. Get this, while you're in the suplex animation YOU CANNOT BE HIT. The enemy you suplex, and the ones around you, will not attack you for a second or two after the animation; and the guy you suplexed will either be dead, or laying on the ground. [b]It gives you a brief second to reload, use an herb, fire, or dodge[/b']. Sometimes, that can be a real help. Granted, you won't ALWAYS hit their knees; but by firing off two or three rounds, you'll MOST LIKELY hit, and that's what counts. I don't know how much it'll help, but it doesn't hurt to try it.[/quote] And that's my point. No matter what you do in the game, there will be times when you're forced to reload in combat. Strategic firing or not, AzureWolf's claim that you'll never have to reload if you time/place your shots correctly is asinine, because we've all executed proper round timing/placement and still find ourselves having to reload in the middle of a group of enemies. The suplex maneuver, like you said, isn't guaranteed to knock down every enemy, so the need to reload mid-combat is very real.

When you work at Boston Market, you find yourself sitting on your ass more than usual. Yeah, there?s a huge dinner rush that can last for two, maybe three hours, but that starts around six or so. If you?re unfortunate enough?or maybe lucky enough, depending on how you look at it?you have absolutely nothing to do in the early to late afternoon. With no customers coming in, nothing needs to get restocked. The hotcase needs a stir every once in a while, and occasionally you?ll need to make sure the coldcase Jello?I?m sorry, Jumping Juice Squares?and chicken salad and such stay fresh. But other than that, you?re keeping the dining room chairs warm. It?s even worse on a Sunday, because the old people usually come in at eleven in the morning, when the store opens. I could never understand why anyone would want Creamed Spinach or Meatloaf before noon?or really, any time in general. Plus, Boston Market doesn?t even serve breakfast. Why we open in the morning is beyond me. I guess Corporate just feels that even if only twenty people want chicken for Sunday breakfast, we need to be open for those twenty people. That really makes a lot of sense. But there was this one Sunday in particular that was absolutely empty nearly the entire morning. We opened at eleven and only had a handful of customers. My coworkers and I sat at a table in the dining area for three hours with nothing to do. David, my boss? 14-year-old son, who didn?t really work there and who wasn?t supposed to be working there, would occasionally survey the hotcase and bring something out. Matt would sit next to me and order his little brother around as much as he could. Their father?our boss?chilled in the office doing paperwork. He didn?t need to be present out front, because Matt was a certifiable Manager. He knew the protocols, he knew the codes. He knew how to run the store. He just didn?t have the title. Plus, Corporate didn?t exactly know. So, David, Matt and I were all leaning back in the uncomfortable wooden chairs, nursing whatever kind of soda we could stand. When you work at Boston Market for the time we did, you start getting tired of the ?variety.? I had a mixed drink of orange soda and fruit punch Hi-C, David had a Diet Coke, and Matt was sipping fruit punch and root beer, which was a pretty ghastly combination now that I think about it. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Boston Market Sundays were at the very bottom of the desperate times spectrum. We were chatting about random crap, just trying to pass the time, when we heard this swoosh. We felt a brief gust of cold air and groaned. Matt and I glanced up. David turned around. I turned to Matt. He asked me whose turn it was. ?I?m not getting up,? I replied. ?Me neither.? We both looked at David and said, ?Get up, Bitch.? David told us we both sucked and got up to serve. We were making obscene gestures with our hands and faces as David tried to keep a straight face for the customer, but he would shoot us an evil glance every now and then. He moved to the register and rang up the meal, making sure to enter the Senior discount. The money was exchanged and David faked the goodbye smile. David walked on back to us and sat down. ?You guys really suck. You?re serving the next two customers that come in.? ?Nah, we don?t think so,? we replied. Matt and I weren?t bad employees?we were actually pretty stellar ones?but quite frankly, when it came to Boston Market Sundays, we just didn?t give a shit.

The piece feels too busy. I think it would look better, cleaner, and clearer if there was just a singular bar going straight across, horizontally. I mean, Sonatas aren't exactly rock anthems. Some of them are "louder" than others, but I'm not getting the soft melodies from this piece.

Call me crazy, but I don't think the harsh, jagged, splintery slashes of black, the inkblots/inkstains, and the ugly feel of the piece (I don't mean that as an insult, necessarily) quite exactly convey an apologetic message. I don't get a nice vibe from the image; I get more of a "Please take me back or I'm going to kill myself I can't live without you I'm in pain when you're not around can't you see what you're doing to me why won't you come back" feel. If that's what you were going for, then you succeeded. If not, however, if you were going for a more romantic, softer, truer apology, then I don't know if the piece works all that well.

[QUOTE=AzureWolf]This goes back to efficienct use of ammo. I don't know about you, but I had the shotgun by that particular scene, and properly-planned (and aimed? O_o) shots will give you more than enough time to reload. Why just slash down to reload a few shots when you can almost kill them with one or two blows in the process? But let's get back to a bigger problem: Why would you need to reload? You obviously aren't using ammo efficiently if you find yourself needing to reload while there are monsters standing. I've played through the entire game, so I'm familiar with every scenario it throws at you. With the exception of the mine cart part, I never found myself needed to reload at crucial points. Hell, I stopped using the knife early in the game and still had to sell ammo to have room to grab herbs. This isn't a boast about how good I am, mind you (my aim is terrible, haha). I'm just saying, if you know which gun to use for a specific situation, and make every shot count, not only will you find yourself never reloading in the middle of a fight, but you will have enough ammo that you'll be forced to sell/throw quite a bit away.[/quote] AW, you can't have perfect shots all the time. You just can't. You can't always have enough ammo. You just can't. Yes, there are some portions in the game where you have quite a bit--more than you would think you need in an RE game--but your lack of ammo reserves often does not depend on your accuracy, because throughout the game, there are enemies constantly stalking you and you will be draining those clips. [quote]if you know which gun to use for a specific situation, and make every shot count, not only will you find yourself never reloading in the middle of a fight[/quote] I find that statement to be particularly naive. Selecting your shots will conserve the clips, yes, but that certainly doesn't guarantee anything. It's not as if popping enemies in the legs all the time is going to magically give you a seemingly infinite clip in combat. You say your aim is terrible. That doesn't really coincide with what you're saying (and implying) in your reply. You've been saying that with solid shots, you can conserve ammo like nothing else, and never have to reload, but then say you have terrible aim. AzureWolf, I do have pretty damn good accuracy in RE4 (my lowest accuracy rating was approximately 85% give or take a few points), and others here do, as well, and we all know that even if you're a frigging crackshot in RE4, you're still going to be needing to reload in combat...you're still going to be running low on ammo at various points in the game. With the new menu change (Inability to reload in the Inventory screen, forcing the player to reload in-game), I find it incredibly hard to believe that players (you in particular with your terrible accuracy) are never having to reload in combat when there are still enemies approaching. [quote]Haha, I think you and I see the Shotgun differently. Certainly, it's faster to fire when someone "melee"'s you. Did you get up to the dogs? That's as "melee" as they get, and the knife's "arc" or whatever is a waste of time and effort. The shotgun is the ultimate melee weapon, as any close-ranged idiot will be sent flying away.[/QUOTE] The Shotgun is handy when the enemies are in the front quadrant...but it's not going to hit anyone in the left and right quadrants. If you want an example of this, take a look at the wind chasm area (the chapter when you see the Merchant through the window). There will be points in that level where the Shotgun is going to be useless, because villagers come at you from three sides and in melee combat, not mid-range. I've gotten past the wolves, AW, lol, but I don't see how that really supports your argument all that well, considering that in order to effectively blast them, they need to be fairly close to each other. They start to attack by leaping into you, so your Shotgun is equally useless in close combat there. If you fire a shot off before they sink their teeth into your throat, fine and dandy, but even then...that's a mid-range shot, not close-combat and sure as hell not melee, so to claim that the Shotgun is the "ultimate melee weapon" is asinine at best. And even then, in mid-range combat (with any enemy), the Shotgun isn't going to be terribly effective apart from buying you some time (i.e., only a KD), because the only times it is truly effective is when you get up close, and even then, there's a very particular window of time when you can fire, because the enemies in the game move in quickly and gouge you as fast as they can. Yes, the Shotgun is handy for various types of combat in the game, but its long range damage capabilities are nil, and the best you're going to get there is a KnockDown. In mid-range combat, there needs to be a grouping of enemies; otherwise, you're just lobbing shells and getting a few kills/KnockDowns. In close-combat, you're only going to be able to hit those directly in front of you; there's very little chance of you hitting those enemies approaching in the left and right quadrants. In melee combat, forget it. Shotgun is handy, yes, but don't see a few moments of Shotgun Uberness and automatically discount the knife's usefulness, because it is extremely useful, especially in close and melee combat.

I hope to ObiWan Kenobi that I didn't look that atrocious in the original pic...lol. I'm so incredibly flattered that you made that for me, Jordan. Even though you made me into a vile, disgusting, malicious, cruel, mean-spirited, heartless, brutal and manipulative monster, I'm still very touched, because, well, that's who I am IRL, which you and Annie will come to realize this Summer. ^_^ Just figured I'd include my little logo for Lady Annie, Mistress of the Dark Side [center][img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22505&stc=1[/img][/center] [left] [/left] [left] [/left] [left]I was just looking at the images again, and damn, Annie, you are a cutie, even when you're immersed in the Dark Side of the Force. I have a very sexy Apprentice. ^_^[/left]

From $5,000,000 to $0 in sixty seconds.

[center]?Only An Hour Away?[/center] [quote]There was an uneasy, almost uncomfortable, tension. It was a pretty big step. Our relationship was going to change. ?You okay?? I asked. ??yes. Just nervous.? ?I know. Should I put it in?? ??I can do it.? She slid the envelope into the mailbox. ?You?re going to Rowan, babe,? I said. Then Melissa hugged me.[/quote]

I've not seen Kane online lately, so I'm going to take over this round. I'm pretty sure I read that in the rules in the starting post. [center][URL=http://img95.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img95&image=gw5270rs.jpg][IMG]http://img95.exs.cx/img95/5905/gw5270rs.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center] [left] [/left] [left] [/left] [left]Screengrab courtesy of GuildWars Beta Weekend Naked Dance Party. Enjoy. XD[/left]

Gamespot just (I believe they just did. I just saw it.) an interview with David Doak. The topic of the interview was the enhanced Mapmaker for Future Perfect, and...they're adding features and tools that I've been longing for since the franchise's conception. You can find it [url=http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/timesplitters3/preview_6118189.html][u]here[/u][/url]. [quote] [b]GS:[/b] What did it lack that you addressed in Future Perfect? [b]DD:[/b] Aside from all of the online functionality and improvements to logic editing, which I've mentioned elsewhere here, we also took a long hard look at how the basic building blocks, the map tiles, fit together. Although both the TS1 and TS2 mapmakers had been very well received, we knew we could make the building part more flexible and make it easier for the user to create the kind of environment they wanted. Universal connecting plugs on all tiles. Any tile can be connected to any other tile with no need for adaptor tiles. More variety of tiles and mirroring of asymmetric tiles. Easier to find a tile to fit that space or refine the map layout. Stackable tiles. Create holes in the floor and massive drops or camping spots for snipers. Open maps with skies and weather. Maps don't have to be underground. A bigger range of features and interactive items to populate the maps with. Flexibility, variety, usability. We've also incorporated technology features from the single-player and co-op story game in Future Perfect, most notably vehicles and a remote-controlled cat![/quote]The change I'm most excited about is the Mapmaker becoming a truly 3D editor. The previous incarnations really weren't true 3D, because we were still limited to building on one floor at a time. Yes, we could have multiple floors, but we were still operating on what functioned as 2D. I'm giddy over stackable tiles, creating holes in the floor, etc. It's one thing I've always wanted to be able to do. Open maps and weather effects could be very interested, as well. The strictly corridor Mapmaker levels could really rock and all, but having an outdoors deathmatch would be super keen. ^_^ Thoughts? Reactions?

Pirate: [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22459&stc=1[/img] Cowboy: [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22460&stc=1[/img] On one hand, we have Captain Hook, a neurotic, sexually confused, strange, Michael Jackson-ish character who wants to kidnap little boys and keep them as slaves (what kind of slaves, we can only guess) aboard his ship, the Jolly Roger...the JOLLY ROGER. The sexual deviancy here needs not be made explicit. On the other hand, we have Clint Eastwood, a take-no-prisoners, take-no-**** bad-*** who stops at nothing to get what he wants, and what he wants is to kick some ***. Nothing fazes him--quite the opposite of Captain Hook, who runs at the sound of a clock. In fact, Clint Eastwood wouldn't run from the clock; he'd find it and kill it thirty times over. He wouldn't be terrified if a croc bit off his hand; that'd just make him angry. Who doesn't want to be a cowboyeee, baaaby?!

I'd select other. Sith Lord. But for the purposes of Cowboys vs Pirates, I'm going to prove the Cowboy superiority. Throughout the history of cinema (which is undoubtedly what many of us look to, as made clear by the posts), there have been famous cowboys and pirates, true. But Cowboys are better because of [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22452&stc=1[/img] If you still don't believe me, look at the heroes of Blazing Saddles: [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22453&stc=1[/img] Still not convinced? [url]http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/saddles/sounds/boys.wav[/url] That's the accompanying dialogue to the above screenshot. Pirates have one famous character. Dread Pirate Roberts. Other than that...they've got nobody that even begins to stand up to the power of The Waco Kid and Black Bart. Roberts may stand a chance against one of them, but as suave and charming and oh-so-cute Roberts may be, Gene Wilder and Cleavon Little can so pwn him. Clearly, Cowboys >>> Pirates.

Just a few quick points here before I get to go play GuildWars (BWEEEE! :D). [QUOTE=Mitch]I believe you messed up on the qutation marks here. Should it read: I'm pretty sure it should be like that. A minor mistake, but worth mention.[/quote] I just checked the Word document of it. The quotation was in the proper place there. Either tech hiccups or I had used an early and/or rough draft. [quote]I found the dialogue from the Willis impersonator here: to be a little too long. You could definitely condense this more, or get rid of some of it. You don't need it all. You are also obviously using this character to make fun of Willis, and it feels a lot like you as the writer are speaking here.[/quote] Of course there was a bit of commentary on Willis' career (cahreah) there, but really, what could you expect? Anyone familiar with Willis' career (even an impersonator) on any level at all would be fully aware of the cheese factor of Die Hard. Plus, I find the sheer ridiculousness of the situation warrants such a monologue. You're impersonating someone, so you're going to try to convey a very solid and comprehensive understanding of their films (which is what the impersonator tried to do in my adaptation). [quote]Another thing I noticed, you'd been using the apostrophe to indicate missing parts of the spoken words, but some of the time you don't use them. e.g.: as opposed to this: It is a minor detail, but it's the picky things that show you took the time and effort in a piece. When you decide to take a format in a piece - such as putting apostrophes to indicate shortening of words via colloquial use - you should stick to it. [/quote] Again, I checked over the actual Word document saved here on my computer, and everything was in order. Either tech issue or early draft. [url=http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=28874][u]News article[/u][/url] There's the actual article for those interested.

GoldenEye, hands-down, best Brosnan Bond movie. It was a remarkable turn for the better for the series, because it successfully touched back upon those darker, Red Scare roots of the original novels/films. The St. Petersburg Statue Park could be a scene out of From Russia With Love. It was that good and the atmosphere that "there." The opening to GoldenEye also brought us back to those days when Bond faced the Soviets and nothing more. The imagery in itself is breathtaking; women taking the hammer and smashing the scythe. It symbolizes perfectly what is going on in GoldenEye. The world is split. The Soviet Union is collapsed. The Cold War is over and Bond no longer has any distinct and explicit enemy to face. He is facing remnants of the Cold War--facing himself, in a sense. M does call him "a relic of the Cold War." He is conflicted; GoldenEye brings that out wonderfully, and the performances don't hurt, either. The recent movies, though, are utterly ridiculous. Bond was "modernized" in GoldenEye, in that he overcame the last remnants of his shadowy Cold War self, and because of this, GoldenEye would have been a fantastic closing chapter to the series. GoldenEye left it on a high note, and at a very intelligent conclusion, if I may say. Bond overcame his shadow (I'd really love to explore this character duality more, but I'm very ill right now), overcame his uncertainty about this new world, and was able to live for once. One could argue that the newer films are so blatantly commercialized because they exist after Bond entered the modern era (a commercialized era), but the focus of the Bond character (and Fleming's motives for writing it) was a Cold War/Red Scare hero, not someone who is going to be facing off against a media mogul and accidentally kill Teri Hatcher in the process

[font=Book Antiqua]"Oh my! You can talk?" Alice exclaimed.[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Miss, you do see these fish lips opening and closing?"[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Yes...but I still don't believe it!"[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Well, deary, believe it. We've always found you humans amusing, did you know that? You are not the only fish in the sea, you know. We fish can do many more things than just talk, in fact."[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Really?"[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Foolish girl, why would I fib?"[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"I suppose you wouldn't...fish aren't known to lie...what other talents do fish have?" Alice asked.[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Come with me down the stream here and you can see."[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Underwater? I wouldn't be able to breathe. I'll drown."[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"Silly humans and their silly perceptions. Come, take hold of my fin here."[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"If you insist, kind fish, I will indulge you."[/font] [font=Book Antiqua]"And...we're off! Be mindful of the currents now, we wouldn't want you to get swept away, now would we?"[/font]

REVISED EPISODE GUIDE [quote]EPISODE IV ?Alderaan? EPISODE V ?Desert of the Twin Suns? EPISODE VI ?Striking Back? [list] [*]EPISODE I ?The Man Behind the Myth? [*]EPISODE II ?Korriban? [*]EPISODE III ?Twilight of the Old Republic? [/list]EPISODE VII ?The Might of the Imperial Navy? EPISODE VIII ?The Forest Moon? EPISODE IX ?The Fall of an Empire? EPISODE X ?Paradise Regained??[/quote]Just dropping in to let everyone know I've revised the Episode Guide. Please make note of the changes and adjust accordingly. I feel I've tightened the focus of the RPG considerably, and the new Episode titles will be accompanied by Episode plot guides when said Episode is drawing near. As before, any questions can be asked here or over AIM, but here is preferred. Also, Boba Fett has been granted first post for this new post cycle in Alderaan, and I've revised the post order, as well. The order (for this post cycle) is the following: [list] [*]Shinmaru [*]Shy [*]Kane [*]Boba Fett [*]Siren [/list]I understand we all have busy schedules (myself included), so the post order is never set in stone. If any have questions, comments, or concerns, please ask them here. EDIT: It appears that Photobucket is no longer working, so I'm also attaching a new HTML text file. Nothing is changed regarding our post areas.

?Bruuce Willis, the Aussie? Ere?s wot happened. I was cruising round on my patrol route, just a smidge outside of Pirot, when this car casually drives by. I was goin to let ?em go, y?know, but then I ?ad to remoind moiself bout moi duuties to the force, cause I?m a police officer?a man of the lahw?and if I were to let this car past without the routine roadside check, well, crikey, I?d be lettin my chief down, as well as all my noble Aussie brethren! I can?t ?ave that, so I flip on me blinkers and siren, and the car pulls over right quick. I pull my cruisah up behind ?im, to the reah. I start the recordah, so if there?s any toipe of skirmish, I?ve got it on video, roight! So I walks on up to the driver and get a look at ?im, and think to moiself, ?Crikey! That?s the wallabee from those Die Haad flicks! But oi quickly compose moi thoughts and request the bloke?s ID.? ?G?day, mate!? he exclaims as he ?ands me ?is passport. ?Oi?m Bruuce Willis, famous stah of the silvah screen and the man who put the Die Haad series on the map! I made three of them, too. I started it with the fresh, cheeky, exoiting and action-packed Die Haad won, then followed that with the tired and formulaic but still smash-hit sequel, Die Haad 2: Die Haadah! Then Die Haad 3: Die Haad with a Vengeance, a furiously high-octane and trite car-chase buddy pictah with the Frenchman Samuel L. Jackson as the loveable Negro sidekick, and dialogue so poorly written that you can see me and Sam cringe as we 'act!' The dialogue was so cheesy that my mug on the cover of the film isn't a publicity still at all! It's an actual snapshot of me during filming when oi realized just how much moi cahreah's plunked in the crappah, mate!? Now, ?e sure looked loike Bruuce Willis, and ?is passport had his pictah on it, but I couldah sworn I?d head Bruuce Willis talking with a blokey American accent, so I asked the fella bout how ?e got his staat in show business. ?Oh, I got my staat in Die Haad, mate! I was just doin commercials and the loike when all of a sudden, this British bloke, Jawn McTeahnan gives me a ringah and says, ?look, mate, we?ve got this paat here that we?d loike you ta reaad for. Care to hop on a linah and read us a bit?? I couldn?t turn down a paat in a Jawn McTeahnan pictah, so I was over there faster than a dingo to a maternity ward!? Now, I staated doubting him at this point, cause I remembered some weird Bruuce Willis show during the 80s. ?e played some sort of detective or something, and that?s really where ?e got his staat, not Die Haad, so I asked im a follow-up question, right, ?Say, mate, who staad in Moonloightin? I remember it was Cybil Shepaad, but I can?t remember who the guy was.? ?That was a young Maatin Sheen, mate!? ?That so?? ?Roight so! After he left, they got Pierce Brosnan to fill the role. It was just loike Remington Steele but it wasn?t!? ?Now, I hate to break it to you, mate, but Bruuce Willis doesn?t talk like that. He?s got a blokey Yankee accent. He?s lived in the states all ?is loife. I?m going to have to arrest you for forgery.? ?What, crikey, I swear I didn?t forge anything!? He staated to whine and complain at that point, but I shut?im up roight quick by tellin im that if he resisted arrest, oi could punish im even furthah. And it just goes to show you...never try ta fool the border patrols, mate! We know film cahreahs!

I was reading through Senny's post, and before I talk about the ending itself, I'd like to expand on his comments regarding Ada's [spoiler]betrayal[/spoiler] at the end of the game. The weird thing about [spoiler]Ada and Wesker[/spoiler] having roles in RE4 is...well, they both bit the big one at the end of their respective games. There was really no question that they both kicked the bucket. I mean, seriously, you get gored through the chest by Tyrant's claw...I don't think you're going to pull through, and last I checked, getting sliced up by the second Tyrant, then falling down off of a walkway into the abyss below...survival just isn't in the cards. But, even in light of the previous games, I don't feel that detracts terribly from RE4, because I don't really view the games in the franchise as full-blown sequels, more of re-tellings of the same concept. Yes, in RE2 Claire comes to Raccoon City to look for Chris, and Leon was in RE2, etc., but the plots were never really interconnected. In the bigger scheme of things, why Claire came to Raccoon City is unimportant. What matters is simply guiding her through the game. Each game really focuses on a particular character and simply places them within the game. The repetition found in the franchise is evidence of that, I think. You could easily supplant Chris with Leon, or Claire with Jill and the game would still function, both in terms of gameplay and concept. I suppose, what I'm saying here is that each RE game is its own chapter--its own remake of the original game, so each game doesn't necessarily have to fit, continuity-wise, because they're all just rehashes of the first game. I see everything as episodes to an ongoing saga, none of which are true sequels, merely just continuing the idea. This is one of the reasons I adore RE4, I think, because it keeps the familiar characters (in keeping with the James Bond-esque sequel series), but creates an entirely [i]new[/i] game, something the previous sequels never did (they essentially just used different character models for different sequels). Of course, Wesker has always been one of the more interesting characters in the franchise--probably my favorite character in the entire franchise--because he's not quite evil and not quite good. He walks that line, sometimes helping you (leaving ammo and so forth), but always having a sinister edge to him. He's a much stronger character than the pussyboy goodygoodies Chris Redfield and Barry Burton, and as much as the ending was anti-climactic in the sense that the game was a rollercoaster throughout, the inclusion of Wesker was, in my mind, not so much as an excuse to have a sequel (though, I won't deny that was a reason) as it was including a character that you just loved to hate and hated to love. Wesker was both evil and good, and represented that duality that so many of those characters lack--he's really the hook for the series. Yes, yes, Umbrella and all...but who cares about Umbrella? Wesker is really the attention-grabber of the franchise; he's the star, lol. I think I went off on a bit of a tangent there, but it was a fun tangent, lol. But Ada was always an edgy character, and I never got the feeling in previous games that she helped because she liked helping. I more got the sense that she helped because she could get something out of it (and the ending to RE4 stays true to this characterization exactly). She did soften up at the end of RE2, but she was kind of dying at that point, so I'm not sure if it was entirely sincere, haha. Regarding the ending...for RE1, the "six multiple endings" wasn't really anything terribly major. You had three per character, and there wasn't any dramatic changes or effects between them. All that changed was the number of characters that flew away in the helicopter. There's no resolution beyond that. There are no real plot wrap-ups, apart from Destruction Of [insert lab complex here]. So, I don't really think the ending to RE4 is all that disappointing in terms of the series itself, because we've always had that kind of bland, simplistic ending. I do think, however, that criticisms of the ending based solely on RE4 itself are legitimate, because RE4 constantly raised the bar for tension and excitement throughout the game, and the final boss battle was easy and relatively simple compared to what RE4's previous bosses involved (the lake monster, for example). It's not a bad Finale (and I can't complain about the classic rocket launcher, haha), but it could have been a bit more given RE4.

I really enjoyed R/B when they were released. They were fresh and cheeky takes on a style of gameplay that wasn't all that exciting when you thought about it. Pokemon was essentially the Final Fantasy random battles but with, well, Pokemon. The variety of different types was really what hooked me, I think. I would read through the old Strat guide just to see what was in store for me when I traveled to Seafoam Island. I particularly enjoyed reading about the Stats and Evolution trees, as well. They were interesting stuff. Some Pokemon had three different Evolutions, others needed special items to evolve, and four Pokemon in the game required you to trade to get their final evolution stages. For what R/B were, they were solid games, and I think they really pushed the Connectivity idea long before it was really being..."suggested," heh. They weren't games like Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles that required the gamer to invest in multiple cables and so forth, just to enjoy the main game on a reasonable level. One of the great components for Connectivity in R/B was the battling, too. Trading was a nice feature, but head-to-head competition was equally satisfying. I recall battles between me and my friend, Scott, that consisted almost entirely of us switching Pokemon in and out, mainly because of the varied types and the rock-paper-scissors aspect of the combat, in which Fire beat Grass, Grass beat Water, and Water beat Fire. No type was the best, so a varied and balanced team was a must if you were going to play. But the game wasn't without its faults, though. MewTwo was unstoppable, and very few (if any) types resisted Psychic attacks. Come to think of it, there were no types that could stand up to Psychic types. Ghost type was listed, but Psychic ripped through them due to their Poison secondary type. Tthe addition of Dark type Pokemon in later entries is a godsend, heh. Actually, even in light of the Psychic domination, the dual-type system was very well-done, and only further required you to think strategically, to assemble a team that could perform well in any given situation. It mainly came down to anticipating, I think. I don't remember R/B having the Ultra Effective damage, but it's very interesting in FireRed/LeafGreen. I'm looking forward to sending out Pikachu against a Gyarados, because Electric types are Super Effective against both Water and Flying types, so Gyarados being Water/Flying would suffer Ultra Effective damage. It should be fun, muahaha. As much as people see the franchise as tired and overdone, I really don't think it is. Sure, the gameplay is formulaic (walk around and battle), but I don't think anyone can argue that the enhanced functionality of the new streamlined menus (this is something people really need to see, because it's so much better), the new Dual-type dynamics, latent abilities and so forth aren't giving the series a major boost. I missed out on Yellow through...whatever the last game was before Ruby/Sapphire. I bought both Ruby and Sapphire, because a new generation of Pokemon games was really appealing, and I wasn't disappointed. FireRed is really the icing on the cake, because it's a next-generation Pokemon game of the originals that originally got me hooked on the series, and that's a very groovy thing.

[QUOTE=Syk3]That's very true. Even what seems like the most nuetral research could look, to either side, like biased data. You have to know where to draw the line to pick out honest, truthfull facts that will ultimately decide how we can make educated decisions on legalization. Like I quoted in my last post.. prohibition laws should be based on how dangerous a substance is. Ideally, I totally agree. But they would have to be completely unbiased facts.. not the "facts" the government has been saying about the herb for years.[/quote]Syk, you're missing one very important detail. Harvard University is neutral research. As I said before to Zeta, I scoured Harvard's page and there's one mention made of federal funding in some 13 pages of Finance background, and in about 20 pages of various other Harvard bios. Their funding primarily comes from private fundraising, most notably spearheaded during the late 90s, I believe. They're not getting funded by the government. You want to talk about neutral studies? They're about as neutral as you can get, and they're reporting results that are a lot more dangerous than you find reported on your support sites. [QUOTE]I'm not going to respond to Siren's post, because that's between him and Zeta. That's all it really is; the topic has been lost in discussion.[/QUOTE]At least touch upon the redundancy of the Pro-Legalization argument, on how Legalizing marijuana will do very little to actually solve any of the problems seen today, how very little will actually change if MJ is Legalized. The only real change we'd see with Legalization is people being able to walk around in public, stoned. That's it, and that's not going to be a benefit for society. I don't see how anyone could deny that, regardless of what "side" they're on. [quote]You know what.. you don't think marijuana (or other drugs for that matter) has (/have) any benefits, so just go ahead and throw out every single piece of music that you listen to, right now. If you're that convinced, please, I implore.[/quote]Oh, c'mon, lol. "Pink Floyd wrote great music while high. Therefore, marijuana is good"? We should see pot as a good thing simply because a few fantastic albums came out of its use during the 60s and 70s? Just like how we should view deafness as a blessing, just because Beethoven wrote some glorious music while he was deaf? Be sensible, Greg, be sensible. EDIT: As Zeta has been unable to understand the concept of an unreliable narrator in the past, I'm going to also take my leave here. With time (meaning, as Zeta graduates from high school and gets out of the small pond), he'll come to understand that pot consumption has very little place in the real world. And, it's interesting that the only two here arguing for marijuana are high schoolers, while the majority of those arguing against (on any level) MJ have long since graduated and have begun mapping out their lives. There are many more productive things one does with one's time, and many more concerns and responsibilities than one finds in high school. Zeta's (and Greg's) preoccupation with pot will disappear entirely once they start looking for a job (drug testing will see to that), and the pothead lifestyle (i.e., getting high everyday) will become a distant memory. Ultimately, anyway, this (high schooler pot) is just a phase.