Brasil

[quote name='Adahn']proof of maturity[/quote] What, calling cards? Photo IDs? "I am 13 years of age. Please do not approach me to engage in any sexual relations with me"? [i]Come on[/i]. Proof of maturity, my -ss. Written proof? Identification cards to state that it's inappropriate? How about the pure and simple fact that the 13-year-old girl is 13-years-old? Or how about the pure and simple fact that she's playing on her Middle School's playground? That isn't proof enough? lol Come on.

DeathBug, I find your comments here to be very, very naive. [quote name='DeathBug']Communists like to say that there's never been an example of "true communism", and that Mao, Stalin, Ho Chi Min and Castro are just dictators misusing the idea. Is it just a coincidence that the same idea is constantly the tool of dictators and tyrants? And if none of their varients are "true" communism, what is?[/quote] I by far am not a Communist, nor communist, and even then, I can say with confidence that the Communism you see in China, the USSR, and Cuba is [i]not[/i] "true communism" in the sense of what Marx was professing. The fact that only dictators and tyrants have used those ideas is irrelevant and doesn't change anything about Socialism or Marx's communism, and also doesn't condemn Marx's teachings, because like it or not, the Communism we see in the world today is a mis-application of Marx's ideas. [QUOTE]Communists also like to say that it's the human drive for competition that ruins communism. It's the human drive for competition that advances society in any way; why would we want to completely eliminate it? That argument doesn't fly either.[/QUOTE] Read Marx. Read what he had to say. Read about where he was living during that time when he began developing these economic principles. Marx's Socialism arose out of Marx's disgust with the labor conditions of England circa the 1850s. Think about the labor conditions for a few moments. You had fathers working from sun-rise to sunset, slaving away (hard labor). They came home and had energy only to eat, relax, and then go to bed to do it all over again the next day. Mothers were on the factory lines. Children were. There were accidents; workers continually were losing fingers. You want to talk about competition advancing society? I think the entire lower and middle class population of 1850s England that are stuck in that rat race economic competitive system might just disagree with you that competition in economics was helping them in any way at all. [QUOTE]You've heard that one of the definitions of insanity is trying the same thing multiple times, expecting different results? It's not really a good fit at all, but that reminds me of communism. How many different societies have to be screwed over by this "Utopian" ideology before we can admit it's flawed? (Not that More's "Utopia" was worth living in in the first place.)[/QUOTE] You want to talk More and Utopia? Fine, lol. Even More himself didn't totally believe in Utopia. It was the solution, but even he wasn't about to go saying he had arrived at the answer. If you were to read Utopia and pay careful attention to the structure of the dialogue between Hythloday and various others, most of which are critical of Utopia, you will find an incredible balance in the dialogues. No side is favored over the other. When writing political satire, it's incredibly difficult to write fair, balanced, and objective dialogue, especially when you agree with one side, like More with Hythloday. More's entire political, social, and economic philosophy can be distilled to one word: Balance. Also, if you were to read Utopia, and then read Marx's writings, you'd find that the ideas are pretty similar. Marx envisioned an equal society; More did, as well. Their writings show that. [QUOTE][b]Granted, I'll admit I'm not unbiased on the subject[/b]. I went to Eastern Europe as a child, and saw what the communist system did to people. Not countries or economies, but people. It was horrid. Now I live in Florida, and the parents of several of my friends chose to jump on a shoddy raft into the Mediterranian rather than live in their "paradise". [/QUOTE] Then why are we having this discussion with you? lol You're not receptive to the idea, because you already have a preconceived notion of what "true communism" is. [quote]So perhaps such experiences have warped my perceptions. But you never see communists hopping aboard a raft to Cuba.[/quote] A bit more than warped, I'd say. And why would Socialists, communists, etc, go to Cuba, anyway, when it's clearly a case of Socialism Gone Bad (ignoring the fact that it's not exactly a prime vacation spot)?

[center][size=5]Marlow[/size] [size=4]Great Britain, Heart of the Empire[/size][/center] [size=2]"If interest were based on appearances alone, Marlow would walk through the crowd unseen. But his eyes possess a fiery sparkle, his voice is rich and smooth. He speaks with a wisdom far beyond his years, and this is why he attracts so many pairs of eager ears." [center]~~~ "Traveling Down the Nile"[/center] There was a time in years gone past when I traveled far and wide, but in none of my adventures was there ever the excitement I felt inside, when I traveled down the Nile in a ship not four feet wide. The water was moving quickly, cascading up the bow, drowning the deck before it and how-- But I stayed my hand from moving, locking it upon the wheel, for if I were to move it then, the rocky shallows of the river would tear hellish gashes in the keel. As my ship and I raced down that torrent of a stream, off in the distance I heard a scream, far beyond the edges of the trees. The shriek was human, that much I know, but the growl that followed? Oh, that was far, far too low. There are some who say there is no fate worse than Death, but I do say to them that perhaps there is, if that bloody screech was that soul's final breath.[/size]

[quote name='Adahn']I was merely pointing out that your post was aimed at Lady Rin and consisted mainly of personal critiques that would have been more effective and appropriate if sent in a private messaage.[/quote] Personal critiques, yes, because I was critiquing her incredibly flawed worldview, and her clinging on to ancient social dogma that perpetuates harmful social and gender-based myths. Where's the problem with that? [quote]I apologize. I guess I'm just a bad judge of character.[/QUOTE] No worries, but you may want to get the whole story before commenting in the future.

[quote name='Adahn']First, Siren, was all that necessary?[/quote] You want some, bring it. Otherwise, shut your mouth and know your role, please. Thanks a bunch. [QUOTE]Almost everything (if not everything) that was in your post could have been sent in a private message, as I am unable to see any part of it that has anything to do with the original topic.[/QUOTE] How about all of what Rin/Ranger is spewing is the "idiotic things that people say about relationships"? :wow: [quote]Baron, Lady Rin, and desertranger; did Lady Rin not answer the question? She wouldn't have answered if she were offended (I think), so I don't really see an argument. [b]If you want to discuss morality and etiquette, start a new thread. It's a worthy topic[/b].[/quote] Rin mentioned it long before I did, Adahn. Remember that whole skewed Arthurian Chivalry? Think about it. [quote]Oh, on a side note, I'd like to point out how happy and amused I am at seeing all the talk about Rin and Ranger. You two are very interesting people, and [b]despite Siren's beliefs, I am confident that we all enjoy your presence and comments here[/b].[/QUOTE] I think four or five various MyO main entries and the 12 to 20 comments that followed might punch a major hole in your assessment there, Adahn.

Lady_Rin, I'm going to make a request on the behalf of everyone here. Will you please start living in reality? I don't mean to be rude, but your entire replies here are nothing but incoherent gibberish that have absolutely no substantial bearing on anything that can be considered worthwhile and/or relevant to real-life. Cases in point: [quote name='Lady_Rin']And that makes you think he doesn't. Not only that he does it for real. I have shoved him onto the same corner used for the children for ill-mannered behavior at the Alamo, a place not known for its manners. The purpose behind timeout can be found in Zen which I have taught the children.[/quote]What does this have to do with anything? What does the Alamo have to do with anything we're discussing here? Furthermore, what is the Alamo? Is it the actual Alamo, the one in Texas? What is it? Your first sentence makes no discernible sense there. What are you talking about? Your paragraph there is just one long ramble with no point whatsoever. Oh, you put Ranger in Time-out at a tourist trap? Big deal. That's not proof that Time-out is effective, because, pardon my bluntness, your relationship is not realistic in the least--in fact, it's based on some bizarre and outlandish Idealistic skewing of Arthurian Chivalry. If you'd care to argue with me about my observation there, by all means, go for it. I've been studying British Lore/Literature for the past four years, and I'm very well-versed in it, as many here know. [QUOTE]There actually is a reason. Most women don't want to be reminded of their age. Especially after their 29th birthday. Mrs H my supervisor is that way, she's 36 and goes overboard on how her body looks. Another example is Lilah, an aquaintance, she's my age. She does botox, had a tummy tuck, enhanced her boobs *giggles* She does everything she can to look younger than she really is . She doesn't like birthday parties and doesn't want any gifts that day since it does remind her of her age. That's why you don't ask. I don't mind. I am comfortable with myself and apperance.[/QUOTE]I don't see how any of this has any bearing on Baron's point. Baron was talking about asking about the age difference. You're trying to focus squarely on age. You still haven't answered his question about why it was so inappropriate to ask about the age difference, especially when you were the one who brought it up first, in your rambling about your history with Ranger. Furthermore, this inane Ideal that it's inappropriate to ask a woman about her age...is an outdated social dogma that dates back long before any of us were around. It's a social dogma that holds little bearing in today's society, and contrary to popular belief, the...devotion to this simply absurd "rule" of social interaction is not improving the level of social interaction...not at all. You're not empowering women, or even encouraging respecting women by hanging on to these outdated social dogma. Would you like to know what you are doing? You're hurting women. Women are insecure about their age because of that social dogma you're preaching here. If we can't ask women about their age, then that implies there's something wrong with older women, which then makes them feel inferior. Lady_Rin, you're damaging women and the social perception of women far more than any of us ever can. [quote]I know you read the thread [url="http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=43810"]it's takes a village[/url], yours was the first response. It's the same thing here. What do you think about virtual hugs or when I go *giggles* or *dances away scattering kisses about* I do care about my online self. As far as I'm concerned this is an extension of the "village". It is also difficult to express your feelings in text, that's how most misunderstandings happen online. So on some forums I do something like this. [url="http://home.earthlink.net/~lady_rin/giggle2.html"]*giggles* click it [/url]in your case since I'm a little frustrated I might do this [url="http://home.earthlink.net/~lady_rin/giggle2.html"]*sigh* click it again please* [/url]or this [url="http://home.earthlink.net/~lady_rin/oh.html"]if you would one more time please click it*[/url].[/quote]Hold on. The "village" isn't real. Again, like the age "Etiquette," it's yet another outdated social dogma that has absolutely no bearing in today's society, and again, I'm going to request that you start living in the present, in reality. Now, what is this "online as an extension of the village" tripe? The "village" was nothing more than a group of people helping to raise a child by providing moral and economic support. I don't see us helping each other raise our children. I don't see Baron here helping you mow your lawn. I don't see anyone here taking your children for walks in the park, or playing with them on the swingset out back. Online as an extension of the village? Give me a break. Lady_Rin, get with the program here and realize that everything you want to believe is a lie. [quote]If you don't care about your online self then it shouldn't matter if I say you are ill-mannered or have no manners. In fact I shouldn't be able to hurt your feelings at all since you don't care about your online self.[/quote]I couldn't care less about my online self. I don't try to present myself in the best light possible. I don't litter my posts with meaningless links and animated anime GIFs in some vain attempt to "prettify" my online persona. Do you know why? Because online means jacksh-t, pardon my language. It means absolutely nothing. I come on here to converse, to catch up with my friends, to goof off, and that's what Baron does, as well. We don't get online to ramble incoherently about unrelated topics. We don't get online to spew twisted Arthurian Chivalry. We don't get online to make ourselves pretty, because it's pointless to do so, and a major, major waste of time. But, hey, you want to continue to waste your time, be my guest. You know what...I want you to really think about what your worldview is. I want you to really think about what it is you do and say. The links you provide do nothing more than color you as an Idealistic fool, no offense. There's a rather wide, thick line between respecting a significant other and taking it to the unhealthy level of hyperbolic Arthurian Chivalry. You crossed that line, so, if you would, please [url="http://img117.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img117&image=s4kstfun00b.jpg"]click[/url]. EDIT: You say it's difficult to express your feelings in text? If you have absolutely no comprehension, and have no idea at all how to use the English language (or any language for that matter) correctly and succinctly, then, yes, you're going to be useless when it comes to conveying a meaning, or expressing an idea. However, if you possess even the most basic Literary functions, there should be no problem at all in clearly stating when you want to say. At that point, any further failure to state a clear and concise point isn't a matter of skill, or difficulty; it's a matter of not wanting to.

I trust this will appease the pacifists here? [center][URL=http://img39.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img39&image=98-DSMiddleEast.jpg][IMG]http://img39.exs.cx/img39/9978/98-DSMiddleEast.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

I'm going to make this quick, because I've got a train to catch. [quote name='Chabichou']Are you saying that the old man deserved to die? That is the injustice I'm talking about! How can anyone deny the fact that what the Israeli soldier did was wrong? Meanwhile, I, even being a palestinian agree that Israeli civilians shouldn't be targetted. It doesn't matter that more Israelis died and just one old man died. "Kill one person and it's as if you killed the whole world. Save one person, and it's as if you saved the whole world". The Israeli soldiers don't have to purposely try to make the amount of casualities on both sides equal! But like I said before, there are far more palestinians dying than Israelis, so the soldiers actually go overboard![/quote] Now you're just trying to stay angry. [QUOTE]Conclusion: The soldier had no right to kill the old man or even demolish the home. Does anyone disagree with this statement?[/QUOTE] Whoa, whoa, [i]whoa[/i]. Hold on there. Nobody in this entire thread has been arguing that Israeli soldiers have the right to kill anyone, so stop trying to spin things in that direction. What everyone [i]has[/i] been saying, however, is that even though both sides aren't innocent, the Palestinians are far more the aggressor here, because of the suicide bombings, because of HAMAS, because of Jihad, because of Arafat, because of...and into infinity. [QUOTE]Well actually, people of all religions commit horrible crimes that even go against the teachings of their religion. When a christian person commits a crime, no one ever looks at his religion and blames it. This only happens to muslims. When a muslim person commits a crime, his religion is stated on the news and people think, "Oh, he's muslim, which means this is what his religion is about". That shows the ignorance of western society. Bobba Fett, this is the biasm I am talking about. It's hidden, it's subtle, so it's difficult to detect.[/QUOTE] Two things. One, The Crusades are something entirely different than what is going on now with the Islamic Extremists. Two, when the Islamic Extremists are saying, "This is what our religion says, and Allah wants us to kill, kill, kill," I seriously do not think any of [i]us[/i] are being racist and/or misconstruing Islam. Train-time. I'll continue this later, but think about what we're all saying here.

[quote name='Takuya']First of all, I think the 'two worlds' concept is interesting, but I don't like the fact that the Dark World damages you. Continuous damage is not something I like having to deal with. Also, I definatly do not like the fact that the three beam weapons you find throughout the game require ammo. Beams aren't supposed to need ammo.[/quote] I must disagree. I absolutely love that the Dark World atmosphere damages you, because it adds an entirely new level of strategy to the game. You really have to plan out what you're doing, where you're going, and time going between the Light bubbles so you spend a minimal amount of time in the toxic areas. The Dark Suit helps minimize the damage, as well, so that's a neat part of the concept. I've run into a few snags with the ammo thing, but I've found that once you get both the Dark and Light beams, replenishing ammo isn't all that difficult: kill with the Dark, get Light ammo, and Light for Dark. With the right rationing of shots, I've been able to restock my ammo supplies up until 1 from the max, because that's just not possible. [QUOTE]I do like the looks of the new Seeker Missile Launcher, and the new Echo Visor could be fun. I'm also glad that you don't have to run from Dark Samus like you did with the SA-X in Metroid Fusion. The other bosses look great, too. I can't wait to fight Quadraxis.[/QUOTE] I've not gotten the Echo Visor yet, but I do love the Seeker Missile Launcher. Really, I'm very impressed with the new door locks, and the variety of locking mechanisms and how to get past them and such. Very cool stuff. I share your sentiments about Dark Samus; I don't think it would have worked very well for a chase sequence...seems more suited to 2D. I've been wowed by the bosses so far. I think the last one I slapped around was the Boost Guardian.

[quote name='Semjaza Azazel']I can see how it would interest quite a bit of people... especially people who still lean towards the "Games used to be better back in my day" ideal.[/quote] To add to what you said there, I'd say I fall into the "Games used to be better back in my day" category, though not entirely. But, even then...the NES Classics are identical to the ones Easter Egged in the Collector's Editions and so forth. The only difference is the control, but for the most part, using a GBA and Link Cable isn't a problem, to get that "Old NES Controller" feel. I know what you mean--rather, I know what those people mean--but it still doesn't make a lick of sense. Oh well, most things make no sense these days, like how I'm actually enjoying Rogue Agent, lol.

[quote name='Chabichou']What the hell do palestinians have to do with Turks?[/quote] HC already spelled it out for you, but I'll repeat what he said, just so you'll see it. Turks=ancient Palestinians, if I'm reading HC's post correctly. The Jews were living there, oppressed by the Turks (ancient Palestinians). The Jews rose up against them, [i]fought for their independence from an oppressive foreign regime[/i] (the Turks--ancient Palestinians). If you want to talk who was there first, the Jews were, and the Turks (ancient Palestinians) were the ones butting in. At least, that's what I read HC's post as. [QUOTE]Since when did every Arabic or Muslim website become biased? See, there's already racism right there![/QUOTE] Ah, [i]hell no[/i]. Don't pull that crap. HC specifically said "your source." He was referring to the [i]one[/i] site you quoted as your support. In the portion of his post that you quoted, he only made mention of that [i]one[/i] source, hence why he did not use the plural form of the word ("sources"). Now, to re-iterate what Xander has said so eloquently, taking the news reports from Al Jazeera and various Middle Eastern news broadcasts with a grain of salt, and being aware that there's a heavy, heavy slant there, just like in American mass media, and understanding that you're not going to get the truth from Al Jazeera (which, incidentally, could be considered an Islamic Extremist broadcasting station), is not--repeat [i]is not[/i]--being racist in any way whatsoever, and to accuse those critical or cynical of Arabic or Muslim websites of being racist is to be a complete and utter fool. [QUOTE]When Galelio presented the heliocentric model of the solar system, he was continuously mocked and I think he was even jailed.[/QUOTE] You do not equal Galileo. [QUOTE]People can be so ignorant.[/QUOTE] Pot. Kettle. Black. [QUOTE]I just don't understand how so many people can ignore the atrocities that happen to palestinians.[/QUOTE] Funny, I just don't understand how some people can ignore the atrocities that are [i]committed[/i] by Palestinians. [QUOTE]No body ever has sympathy for them.[/QUOTE] With the ranting and vitriol we see from you, I wonder why. [QUOTE]For every 100 palestinians killed, 7 israelis are killed. That's not enough evidence for you which side is more guilty?[/QUOTE] Do you have independent, international facts to support this ratio, or do you only have Anti-Western or Pro-Extremist sites to quote? [QUOTE]And it's Israeli soldiers working for their government who kill the palestinians, not Israeli suicide bombers.[/QUOTE] And it's [i]both[/i] Palestinian suicide bombers and soldiers working for their government who kill the Israelis. [QUOTE]So if a suicide bomber is a terrorist, why aren't the Israeli soldiers?[/QUOTE] Why aren't the Palestinian soldiers? [QUOTE]Their government is corrupt and racist to palestinians Arabs, and Muslims. They see themselves as superior to the everyone.[/QUOTE] And Arafat's administration was squeaky clean? In his refusal to give any real consideration to peace solutions, or his refusal to take any type of pro-active role in minimizing attacks--I think it's common understanding that he was funding and encouraging them--how is Arafat not implying that he feels the Palestinians are superior to everyone? [QUOTE]That's why Israel must be wiped off the map.[/QUOTE] And if you were to talk to Israelis, they'd say the same thing about Palestine. Odd, don't you think? [QUOTE]And just for the record, suicide bombers end up killing themselves too, so justice has been served to them. Don't take it out on Palestinian children.[/QUOTE] Suicide does not equal justice. [QUOTE]I looked through the website and I don't see anything Anti American. What the hell are you trying to prove? "Oh it's Egyptian, which is Arabic which MUST be anti-American".[/QUOTE] I'd suggest you're ignoring it, convincing yourself it's not there, or that you just don't want to see it. [QUOTE]Sorry you need a better argument there.[/QUOTE] Sorry, but you need a better argument there. [quote]What about my people? How come no body stands up for their rights? How come no body cries for them?[/QUOTE] Because of people like you, who just rant and rant and rant, with little to no regard for common sense and reason, that's why.

[quote name='50 cent']Okay apparently somebody doesn't know the meaning of quick easy kill.[/quote]Quick easy kill; (kwik eeze kil): a kill achieved in gaming that is fast and painless, that requires little to no effort on the part of the attacker. [QUOTE]Okay first of all I have never seen or heard ( other than you) of an elite whipping out a sword when not in range. I have only seen elites whip out there swords within the distance of that dashing capability.[/QUOTE]I've seen it happen, lol. It [i]does[/i] happen. [QUOTE]I mean I have played online a few times and you'll be suprised at how much people take out the sword even when you think there not in range,[/QUOTE]Just because people do it does not make it a sound combat tactic. [QUOTE]because first off if you are blasting somebody with a weapon its harder to see the enemy so its harder to land shots so you can get closer,[/QUOTE]I can see my target pretty darn easily, even when I'm blasting it. I can keep a bead on my opponent quite easily. [QUOTE]second if it is any type of plasma weapon they can barely turn or look up and down,[/QUOTE]Plasma Rifle? As I recall, the turn/look rates on the Plasma weapons are pretty solid, I'd say, and the Energy Sword has a similarly fast turn rate. What are you talking about? [QUOTE]third the range/dashing thing is like huge[/QUOTE]It's not huge, lol. It's not even roughly 10 feet. [QUOTE]I mean at beaver creek someone was on the point of one of the buildings I looked at them waited for the cross hairs to turn red then I dashed at them and killed them, it friggin looked like I super jumped at them and killed them and thats pretty far apart.[/QUOTE]Beaver Creek is the smallest arena in the game, so I hardly think it's an accurate measuring tool for what you're doing. [QUOTE]So yes you can't see the enemy very well[/QUOTE]I'm able to see my enemy pretty well regardless of what's going on. [quote]so the elites pull it out when in dashing distance then they slice you in one hit,[/quote]Oh, I think it's a bit more than dashing distance when they pull it out, considering what we've all been discussing here. [quote]becasue come on legendary you don't die like that I mean you die faster yes but not where you take 2 bullets and your gone. It takes a while still but none the less or more than 20 shots but hey twenty shots threw metal is still alot of damage.[/quote]...I actually can't see any point in here that relates to anything I'm saying. I can't see any point at all here. [QUOTE]Obviously not because your forgetting that dashing capability and it will kill in one hit. So think pretty good range, really friggin strong[/QUOTE]It's good range if you're in close combat, lol, and in a [i]ranged[/i] combat situation, close combat and melee are not going to help you. Energy Sword Insta-Kill or not, I don't see how you're able to deny that it's poor battle strategy to go melee in a firefight. [QUOTE]Hey elites still melee they don't always pull out the sword because hey they still know they can die if they do but they can still get us if they do. So it really doesn't matter how you do it.[/QUOTE]What is this "they still know" business? The Elites don't "know" anything; they're programmed to react in a certain way. They're not real, they're not human; they're computer programs, lines of code. And you've been saying in your entire reply here how Elites will essentially exclusively use the sword in close combat, but now you're saying that they will hit you with the butt of their Plasma Rifle? Read my next point. [QUOTE]Oh and I still melee with my gun even if I do have a sword but **** it's not like they have to use it to kill us because thats how your making it sound.[/QUOTE]Here's my next point: if you have an Energy Sword and you're in close combat, and instead of using the sword, you're using the butt of your gun, you're making a poor combat tactic decision, and Elites are no different. If they're clocking you in the head with a Plasma Rifle's back-end, and they have an Energy Sword they could be using, they're making a combat mistake, and error in judgment. They're using poor strategy. [QUOTE]It does make sense because you have to remember they still over heat there weapons plus I am one of the millions of people who have only seen them pull it out when close or within striking distance.[/QUOTE]Now, perhaps I just fire the Plasma Rifles differently than you do, but I've never had the thing overheat more than a few times in an hour, because I pace my firerate. I'm not holding the trigger down. If I can prevent, or at least minimize, the amount of times my Plasma weapons overheat, then the Elites can, too, and if their weapons are overheating in a firefight, forcing them to go melee in a ranged combat situation, then they again are using poor combat strategy by firing their weapons to the point of an overheat. [QUOTE]Hey no ******* everyone can outwit them but hey the people that worked on the AI made those moves so really its not a computer we are out smarting its another person.[/QUOTE]Whoever it is, or whatever it is, it's not up to snuff, lol. [QUOTE]Oh also you have to predict a enemy move sometime I mean look at online if you don't ever predict another persons move then how will you kill them like if you are in a banshee at coagulation with rockets as the weapons obviously they will shoot rockets so you dogde them plus they don't always notice you. So you will have predictions no matter what. It is what makes it fun but hey I do agree there is a little to much move prediction going on but not that much to be complaining. Also the dodge you do dodge then shoot because when there back is facing you then you blast the ******* out of them its how you kill the enemy,[/QUOTE]Honestly, if I can predict too much in any game, I think I should have the right to voice that criticism. Do you disagree? [QUOTE]strategy comes from how you are going to move in a covenant controlled location [b]you need to know how to kill them without getting yourself killed especially when there is snipers present, duh[/b].[/QUOTE]Strategy? I just memorize enemy locations (including snipers), because they don't change locations, duh. [QUOTE]You still don't get it thats why they have side storys and also you don't have that feeling oh this is what the enemy is thinking right now unless they are rushing you. So I don't get what you are getting at.[/QUOTE]If you don't understand my point, I don't think you're quite in the position to tell me I "don't get it." And since you don't understand what I mean, I'll explain it in Layman's Terms. When you're writing a screenplay with some 4000 years of backstory, you're screwing yourself over, because there is no way in hell you're going to be able to effectively convey that entire backstory in the 90-page film itself. Screenplays are written to be self-contained. Even The Matrix was self-contained, because the EU materials in that franchise did not directly relate to the main characters in the main films. What I mean by this is, we did not need The Animatrix to see and understand what was going on in The Matrix Trilogy itself, because the necessary backstory and information were concise enough to present to us through the course of the film itself, and we did not need EU materials. We still got them, though, because the creators wanted to, not that they needed to. Do you understand now? The developers of Halo were trying to make their game something it's not. They were trying to do too many things, have too extensive a backstory for what ultimately was a "short and sweet" FPS. By including this backstory that [i]needed[/i] five novels, a comic book, a lunchbox, etc, to be told so the audience would understand it, they were violating the Golden Rule of screenwriting: Thou shalt not write more than thou can show. That's as simple as I can explain it. If you don't get it still, there's nothing more I can say to help you, apart from "just trust me on this." [quote]Okay it was noticed before so I don't know who told you this or how this came to be. I loved Chronicles of Riddick that game was great but to me that story wasn't as great as halo's so I didn't like it as much but the environments and AI was great but still they were predicatble and matter of fact that is my next favorite game. It was what the story had to tell us that got us all addicted, plus there multiplayer was the bomb because the weapons rocked so it was like a hardcore match in just a game instead of one shot your dead it was alot more fun because you stayed alive longer and it featured weapons of all sorts and acuracy.[/quote]I'm not talking about plot when I mention CoR. I'm talking about the AI, which was identical to Halo's. Don't misconstrue what I'm saying, either. I never, never said that CoR's AI was unpredictable, nor did I ever say that PD's AI was unpredictable, nor did I ever say that XIII's AI was unpredictable. What I [i]did[/i] say, however, and what I [i]am[/i] saying, is that the AI of Halo has been around far, far longer than Halo ever was, and Halo should not be treated as the savior of FPS AI, because it's simply retreading old ground that was treaded years ago. [quote]If you have never heard the says "It's not what you see that matters most, for that is just a thumbnail of what is uncovered beneath." that right there tells you to listen closely to what they say, watch what is happening because if don't listen you never get the entire story because it actually rocks and it is way good because this story is one of those stories never told before. So what I'm saying is look deeper into a game to get the full experience and you'll enjoy it more.[/QUOTE]Funny you should mention the whole "listen and understand what someone is saying," because that's precisely what you're [i]not[/i] doing here. By the way, the story of Halo has been told many, many times before. Check out the works of Phillip K. Dick, James Cameron, Harlan Ellison, Gene Roddenberry, Isaac Asimov, Ridley Scott, George Lucas, William Shakespeare, Homer, John Carpenter, Rod Sterling...the list goes on and on.

Even though I just don't have the energy to get drawn into this (pity, too, because I'm aching for a debate lately), I'd like to make one small point here. [quote name='Chabichou]Looks like you have given in to the dumb propaganda which you claim to be so completely against. [b]Jihad simply means "struggle", so it can take on many forms. On of them fighting for the sake of Islam.[/b] It doesn't mean we go and bomb Israeli civilians. That's not Jihad. Even warfare is discussed in the Quran. God tells us that we may not harm women and children and the elderly or even the men who aren't fighting you. [b]Islam never takes the offensive side in war. We are only supposed to take the defensive side[/b']. If the leaders are calling for Jihad, they mean protect your country and people. When Israeli soldiers come to your city with bulldozers to destroy the Palestinian homes, Palestinians have every right to defend themselves. Sometimes they throw rocks. These are the civilians' only weapons. The Israeli soldiers actually see this as a threat? They are the ones with the guns and bullet proof vests and helmets. They actually shoot at the palestinian civilians and kill them because the threw rocks? A responsible soldier who is simply protecting his people shouldn't do that.[/quote] It's very clear how Boba Fett was using the term "Jihad," Chabi, so I think it's extremely ignorant of you to try to spin it in some weird tangent. It's undeniable that when we talk about "Jihad," we're specifically talking about the "Jihad" called for by Bin Laden and various other Islamic Extremists, and when we mention how there's this extreme scarcity of Jewish leaders calling for "Jihad," that Jihad is the same Jihad of the Islamic Extremists. I don't even think you should try to spin the Jihad we're talking about as some sort of defensive measure, because the Jihad that Bin Laden and his ilk is calling for is being used as an [i]offensive[/i] measure. Like a few have said here, Israel isn't totally innocent, but to ignore precisely what's going on here, and portray Palestinians as a bunch of freedom fighters? That's just asinine. Really, everyone here needs to closely watch Star Wars a few times, I think. And I mean [i]really watch it[/i]. I think a lot of this Middle East conflict will become strikingly clear after it.

I have yet to beat KOTOR on total Dark Side. I was just about to, and then my Xbox died on me, and I've yet to get far in my new file on my new system. *grumbles* I really long for the day when I'm not bored by FPS AI. I think that's why I'm excited about Live and all, because I'll be able to play against human opponents anytime I want, as opposed to the rare Offline Deathmatches with my friends I host around here. I guess they're too inconsistent these days to be entirely worthwhile. The last one fizzled out before midnight, which is "eh" in and of itself. I do enjoy what I can in Halo 2, though; I find that the co-op is really what saves the Campaign mode. It was incredibly fun to hop into the Scorpion Tank and start blasting down that bridge, stopping momentarily to park near the rail so my brother could retrive a Ghost that had inexplicably bounced up and landed perfectly onto it, blowing ships out of the sky with Dan zipping on ahead and being a nuisance to the opposition (and sometimes getting in the way of those cannon shells, lol). Then he hopped into a Wraith at the end of the bridge and we proceeded to barrel through the tunnel with two doom vehicles, as it were. He and I have a good time in the Offline Multi, as well. We've had some neat matches in Burial Mounds. There was one time where I managed to jump over his SMG fire on an angle and slice his head off with an Energy Sword. That was pretty neat. I have fond memories of our sniper duels a la Enemy at the Gates, where he was using a conventional Sniper Rifle and I, a Beam Rifle. This all brings me back to what I said earlier, actually. The game itself is pretty ordinary. It's just the usual stuff that you'd find in an FPS, but the enjoyment of the game is directly related to whom you're playing with. It's the gamers make the game; not the game makes the game. About the Energy Sword, it would have certainly made sense to have an "ammo" count for it in Multi, but to my knowledge, it seems that there's only one sword available at one time. In the time I've played Multi, I've only seen the Energy Sword when neither of us had it. If one of us did, it wouldn't respawn. Maybe I was just seeing things, I don't know.

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Not if it works, heh. Even in multi, if I have a sword I'll most likely use it. It's effective as soon as you're within 10 yards or so, because as long as you can somewhat close the distance (which is rarely difficult), you can get a dash kill which covers 15 feet no problem.[/quote] I've found the max distance for the dash kill is only about 7 feet, actually, 9 at the most. Regardless of the maneuver's potential effectiveness up-close, it's still a maneuver that's haphazard in a ranged combat situation, and in multi, because as you're closing the distance, the other player is backtracking and firing (running n gunning), and those rounds will be hitting you enough to damage you significantly and threaten the kill, I doubt that "rarely difficult" is an appropriate adjective here. ~_^ [QUOTE]I'm not sure they do it "under heavy fire." But if you start to play really defensively, it makes sense to go after you with a plasma sword because the sword is much more difficult to consistently avoid. You can get hit by some stray bullets, but no stray sword swipe. I can say one thing for sure. Every time an elite has pullled a sword on me so far, I have been less than appreciative. I feel much better in a distanced battle than when elites with as much life as me try to engage me in melee.[/QUOTE] When you're playing defensively, they're going on the offensive, so if they continue to fire Plasma rounds at you and hit nothing but wall, or column, etc, they're not really executing sound combat strategy, are they? If you're behind a doorjam, and the whine of Plasma Rifles discharging is still ringing in your ears, albeit a bit muted from the stone wall, and the AI doesn't show any signs of running in with any Energy Sword, is the AI all that sound? I mean, honestly. If I were playing, and you had ducked behind a wall so your shield could recharge, I'd bring out that sword and go to gouge your face out with it, lol. If the AI doesn't do that too often, what's the point of playing against the AI? Frankly, I've become bored with FPS AI of late. I need human opponents who actually think, as opposed to the various Grunts and Elites who just run right at me...*sigh*...guess I'll see you on Live, right? ~_^ [QUOTE]Call it as simple a term as you want. It betrays nothing about the actual execution.[/QUOTE] The actual execution is running n gunning...how is that supposed to be seen as anything different than run n gun? [QUOTE]Human movement can be easy to predict as well. That's why strategy must be complemented with precision, which elites have plenty of. And on the higher difficulty levels, the "patterns" of the elites are more difficult to exploit and altogether deal with.[/QUOTE] The patterns are still there, though, lol. They're programmed a certain way; all you have to do is notice what that programming does and how the AI acts because of it. [quote]XIII I didn't play. Riddick put me off with its shoddy demo. And the DarkSim, well I've had extensive play time versus all versions of those. PD is my favorite FPS, you see. But I can't say the actual AI was anything high-level, especially in comparison to Halo's. Indeed, the DarkSim was all about flawless shooting and running like a beast (did it teleport when you weren't looking? I sometimes got that feeling). But the battle strategy of a DarkSim was much closer to "run in and shoot until opponent is dead" than is the strategy of Halo's smarter units. PD is good, but its AI really doesn't compare in complexity and adaptability. Not at all.[/QUOTE] It depends on the level, but the DarkSims will flank you. They will bottleneck you. They will pin you, lol. I've played PD till the cartridge wore out, too, and the times when they're going to run straight in is when there's only one entrance to the room. Other than that, they'll go down the hallway you've got your back turned to...it's not beneath them. After all, there are no ethics in the spy game, and the AI is no different. And check out XIII and Riddick when you have a chance.

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Those marines are in serious ****, to be honest with you. I wish you could tell them to stay back and hide like wimps, because they like to go in guns blazing, and next thing you know you find their bodies in a dark corner somewhere. I don't think they have shields. I've shot my share of marines, and I've never noticed any shield flash as a result of gunfire.[/quote]So they're not very durable then, meaning, it doesn't take too many shots from a Plasma Rifle, and anytime the Marines are being used for Elite target practice, that means more ammo will be used for the delightful purpose of either killing MC, or killing the wall he's hiding behind, as it were. [QUOTE]This "knife" is deadlier than any gun out there, heh. Believe me, as soon as an elite decides it's time to whip out the ole' plasma sword, you're in some serious **** because those things kill instantly. A gun shot your shield can handle. A slash from the plasma sword, not so much. Elites might be in a *ranged* combat disadvantage if they are using a sword, but they can close the distance pretty quick and very soon the combat is not as ranged as you'd like it to be. Honestly, have you never fought a sword-wielding elite? They're the riskiest mofos to take on. On the higher difficulties, where they won't die from non-stop gunfire while running at you in a rage, they are very likely to kill you if you aren't good at avoiding them.[/QUOTE]Oh, I don't doubt the "knife" at all. I'm fully aware of its destructive capabilities. I've sliced up my brother a few times with it in Multi, and I am well aware of just how dangerous sword-wielding Elites are. With that said, however, the point remains that using a sword in a ranged combat situation is a poor strategic decision, regardless of the ability to get in close after whipping it out. I only go Melee when I'm in close combat, or when I run out of ammo. I'm not about to pull out a blade at 50 yards out, or even 10 feet out, because if there's gunfire involved, a blade will not be effective until I get in close. When I get in close, however, the blade starts cutting. But as it stands now, if the Elites can do this kind of damage on Legendary by using the Plasma Rifles and that's it, it makes no sense whatsoever to switch to a Melee weapon in the middle of a firefight and begin to close the gap under heavy fire. And when they're rushing at you, the avoiding you're doing is run n gun, lol. [QUOTE]I've not seen an Elite actually run out of firepower, honestly. If you can run an Elite out of ammo, that means you did a heck of a job drawing its fire and not getting hit. More power to ya, heh.[/QUOTE]Remember what you said earlier. Humans can outwit the computer. It's really not that hard, hehe. I just look for patterns, really, and...the enemy movement is pretty predictable, honestly. And plus, you see how quickly you can drain a Plasma Rifle; I don't see why it's any different for Covenant forces. [QUOTE]I agree that the backstory is a bit too detailed considering how much crappier the Halo 2 story is without it and how lousy a job the game does of communicating that backstory. The plot is good, it's just told like crap. And yeah, the Making Of Halo 2 on that special disk blew. Really, I'd have been happier with a blank DVD-R+ than that "special bonus disk" garbage they threw in.[/QUOTE]Yeah, it's like screenwriting and "show don't tell." You can write something like, "His inner monologue is screaming," but you aren't going to be able to turn to the audience and say, "This is what this character is thinking right now." I think that's definitely one of the pitfalls that Halo plummeted into, among other things. The story that they wanted to tell wasn't concise or focused in the least, and they wanted to squeeze a whole lot into a tiny, itty, bitty space. And that's actually why I'm interested in the news that Ridley Scott might helm a Halo movie, because I'm looking for him to bring that focused sensibility to it. [quote]Care to mention the FPSs that you've seen enemies do what elites in Halo 2 on Legendary do? I am curious, because then those FPSs didn't get some credit they deserve.[/QUOTE]Perfect Dark's DarkSim, and believe it or not, on the hardest difficulty, the enemies in XIII. Chronicles of Riddick, too, and these are just the "no-name" FPS (except for PD, of course). There's some impressive stuff going on in those games, and people just became obsessed with Halo/Halo 2, thinking what they were seeing was unrealized before, but it's been very much realized before, just commercially ignored.

[quote]First, we postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion on average, we can predict that all people and all souls go to hell on average. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Thus, there are two possible conditions: 1) If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, than the temperature and pressure in hell will increase exponentially until all hell breaks loose. -OR- 2) If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over. We can solve this (de)lemma with the 1990 postulation of Ms. Theresa LeClair, the woman who lived across the hall from me in first year residence. Since I have still not been successful in obtaining sexual relations with her, I know that condition two has not been met, and thus it can be concluded that condition one is true, and therefore that hell is exothermic.[/quote] Found at: [url="http://www.psc.edu/~deerfiel/Jokes/pchem.html"]http://www.psc.edu/~deerfiel/Jokes/pchem.html[/url] There's your answer. ^_^

[quote name='Sol-Blade']Well, I'm not going to lie to you, your point is valid and I am at loss of words right now! You win...lol[/quote]^_^ [quote]But seriously, the only situation I can figure them losing ammo when they aren't firing at you, would be if they were firing at other Marines (And there are Marines in almost every Master Chief mission) and after they died, they also run up to the corpse and blast it a couple times. But all in all, they could not even be running out of ammo at all. They might just be switching over to their sword for the hell of it.[/quote]But if on Legendary, the Elites can kill MC that quickly, and MC is the main character, the cybernetically-enhanced Incredible Hulk, the larger-than-life superhero of Halo...wouldn't that entail the Marines requiring less of a push to become very much dead? If MC can get killed that easily in Legendary, are the Marines (secondary characters, keep in mind) really going to be as tough, with that enhanced enemy damage going on? Seems to me they're going to fall even faster, with less ammo expended, which means more ammo to waste by firing at us, as we're hiding, waiting for our shields to recharge. Do the Marines have shields, by the way? Also, if the computer AI was as good as people are saying, why would the Elites be pulling out an Energy Sword just for the hell of it, especially if there is still ranged combat going on? In ranged combat, if you still have a ranged weapon, you use it. It's like you don't go into a gunfight with a knife. Really, if they're whipping out their Energy Swords at that point, there are only two possibilities: 1) They ran out of ammo, which puts them at a serious Ranged combat disadvantage. 2) They're using a Melee weapon in Ranged combat, which puts them at a serious Ranged combat disadvantage. [quote]Then again, I once picked up the Plasma Rifle he threw and it had a charge of 2. Who knows? Maybe when the AI is firing, their weapons deplete at a much faster rate than normal, even if they fire the same amount of shots as you do. If all Elites spawn with their Plasma weapons at 100 charge, then how come after only firing a few shots their weapons suddenly have charges of around 75-80? I think that could be a possiblity, but only if the whole Spawn with Full Charge rule really exists![/quote]Seems like the question you're raising here is putting a serious hole in the solidity of Halo 2's design. There are some rather peculiar inconsistencies with the ammo usage, aren't there? Why would there be a faster weapon depletion rate for the AI? It just doesn't make any sense to put something like that in there. Why would Elite warriors, who are incredibly well-trained to use Covenant weaponry, keep in mind, be expending [i]more[/i] ammo than MC when they fire? If they're trained with their own brand of weaponry, it seems to me that it'd make more sense for the Elite to be able to [i]conserve[/i] ammo with each shot. Don't you agree? [QUOTE]Yes, the game was overhyped. I by far never said it was going to be revolutionary, or genre-changing in the least. But, it is a good game. Little flaws, yes. But as I argured with Fable, "Love the game for what it is, not what it is hyped up to be..."[/QUOTE]I actually didn't buy into the hype at all, and I wasn't impressed at all by the original Halo, so I was coming into Halo 2 pretty much even. I do appreciate the game for what it is (solid FPS), but "what it is" is also a [i]weird[/i] and sometimes questionable game design in parts. [quote]Heh, the more and more I read my posts I am beginning to look like a Halo fanboy...I'm not. I just really enjoy the game, most notably the story! Take it seriously, there is alot more there than meets the eye! :D [/QUOTE]There are some neat parallels there, but considering that they needed the EU novels and all to tell the entire story, I think that's a sign that there's just way too much backstory for a game. They wrote out a screenplay of sorts for the games, and described it as a feature-length film (which, length-wise, it was...90-120 minutes). But I think what most fail to realize is it doesn't matter how much of a backstory you have, because you're not going to be able to show it. I think the precise illustration of this is during the Making Of Halo 2 on the DVD. When they were talking about the various voice actors recording lines and such, we had two producers talking. I forget their names, but one was the head writer or something, and the other was a co-producer, or something to that effect. Well, they wanted the actress to say her line faster, and when she asked if there was any particular way they wanted, or something like that, the writer started talking about the history of the Covenant, and it sounds like he went on for a good couple of minutes. After he was finished, the actress said, "So, you just want me to say it faster?" The co-producer replied, "Yes, yes--just say it faster." I think that's precisely what's going on, even in the games themselves. The backstory is just so huge, so specifically broad, that they're simply not going to be able to convey the story effectively in such a short space, and I think they bit off more than they could chew. This actually relates to the Alien/Aliens comparison I've been reading about, too. While it sounds good to relate the two franchises, it doesn't work for the plain and simple reason that Ridley Scott knew what he had to work with in Alien, and did it. There was nothing extraneous in there; he had what he had, he knew that, and he did it. Halo, on the other hand, the producers and creative talent behind the project, while damn good at what they do, are doing the opposite of what Ridley Scott was doing in Alien. They're trying to make something more than what they really have, and I think it shows. When the writer was going on and on about the Covenant, when all the actress needed was to be told to say it faster, there's an imbalance there between what they want to do and what they need. So, I think there's a fairly clear fundamental difference between the two franchises. EDIT: You had posted before I did, Sciros, so to answer your question, I'm just not seeing any gameplay/strategies in Halo/Halo 2 that I haven't seen before.

If they're not just blasting the wall, how are they running out of ammo? Higher fire rates or not, the only way for them to deplete their Plasma Cells is to fire their weapons (or I simply haven't come across the Cell Drain areas yet :p), and if they're drying up their Plasma Cells, that would imply they've been pulling those triggers quite often, and most likely, in your direction, as you are their enemy and such. But since you're behind the wall, and they're not hitting you with the projectile fire, they simply shouldn't be firing, because it's a waste of ammo. Higher fire rate or not, they're still firing, and still running out of ammo, and therefore, they're not being all that effective, in fact using pretty poor judgment and strategy. Don't you agree? [quote=Sol]Actually, on Legendary and Heroic, all the Covenant you fight are all higher ranks and [b]they do indeed have better AI[/b]. They will throw more grenades, actually flank you (To the point where you'll mouth WTF a couple times), fire extremely accurately...they rarely miss with any weapon...even the Fuel Rod, and worst off all is that at least 50% of all weapon fire is an instant death. They will take your shield down in seconds, so get used it. I think Legendary on Halo II surpasses Ninja Gaiden for my Hard as Hell game of the year. lol You'll learn to hate the Jackal Snipers, they are One-Shot kill on Legendary. It's all about who can fire their trigger faster...[/quote] I took the opening, bolded sentence there to be your thesis statement, and then the following sentences as support for the thesis, which would mean that the discussions about grenades, flanking, and accuracy were all related to supporting your point that the AI is improved. Guess you just phrased it awkwardly, then? ~_^ The tactics you just went through are nice and all, but they're still to be expected. They're still commonplace military strategies to place shields up-front, grenaders behind them, and projectiles in the back row. In fact, it's really no different from Roman combat, or Nordic, or even modern military procedures. It's all run-of-the-mill stuff, yet people are still saying that Halo's combat is the best ever, or blows everything else away, etc etc, when it's just the same type of stuff you'd find in both real life and in other FPS. Halo 2 isn't a bad game, of course, but it's not revolutionary in the least, apart from the online component.

Firstly, I think it actually does matter quite a bit exactly [i]why[/i] the Covenant makes you their whipping boy, because if they're doing so simply because they've been jacked-up on Steroids, as it were, instead of outmaneuvering you, I think there's a fundamental difference there that needs to be recognized, because the former is simply a brute force boost, while the latter is an actual AI boost. An Elite or a Jackal being able to kill you in one shot in Legendary is not indicative of, nor is it conclusive of, an increased artifical intelligence; it just means that they're more accurate, and their shot damage has been increased. To avoid death, you need to develop different strategies to kill these super-enemies, some strategies being taking to the rooftops to pick them off from above. However, these strategies are nothing new, and it still comes down to the fundamental level of run n gun, a basic gameplay facet that can be found in virtually every single FPS ever made, sans Doom 1&2, and any other FPS with a non-existent vertical look control. Secondly, Sol, about your point regarding Elites depleting their Plasma Cells, then rushing you with an Energy Sword, going on the offensive, etc...if they're not hitting you with the projectile weapons, because you're hiding behind a wall, why would they drain those cells in the first place if they're hitting nothing but wall? Why waste ammo? By that same token, why wouldn't they just rush in to begin with and start hacking away with the Energy Sword? Furthermore, if you're hiding (i.e., pinned down, i.e., on the defensive), and they're shooting (i.e., attacking), that means they're on the offensive to begin with. I sound like I'm bashing the game, but I'm not. I do enjoy it, but these little things irk me to no end, lol, because they're pretty weird and iffy AI faults in my opinion. EDIT: And your friend has an...ah...[i]interesting[/i] way of putting things, Dmitry.

Sol, the flanking is definitely strategy boost, and the grenades could be considered that, too, but the accuracy is far from a strategy boost--it's still the "stronger and faster" enemy idea. But, I look forward to being challenged as opposed to simply getting swarmed. I screengrabbed a few shots from the Special Edition copy of Halo 2, specifically, the Behind the Scenes look. I apologize for the quality of these screengrabs; I have a feeling there's some type of copyright protection on the bonus DVD, lol, so the images come out somewhat scrambled. But, it's really just a discoloration, I think, and the facial expressions are still pretty clear, haha. [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_163.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/1920/PDVD_163.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_147.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/3413/PDVD_147.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_150.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/8597/PDVD_150.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_151.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/5986/PDVD_151.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_153.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/5646/PDVD_153.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_154.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/3897/PDVD_154.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_161.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/43/PDVD_161.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://img131.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img131&image=PDVD_164.jpg"][img]http://img131.exs.cx/img131/3613/PDVD_164.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center] [/center] Some of these facial expressions are priceless. XD

Yeah, it does have that Charlesness to it, but I wasn't going for anything like that, of course. I was more concerned with the thematic of the idea, really, how sick things need to get put down, like Old Yeller and bad threads.

Okay, so then posts aren't really an issue here at all, or a focus of any type whatsoever. They really have nothing to do with the signatures or reactions to the signatures. If you were to run a search in this forum, I believe, for threads about signature rules, you'll find that there are some guidelines in place, and particular little things that the Mods encourage (like no clashing neon texts, no multi-line lists, etc). Hell, it's gotten a lot better over the past year, too. I remember some signatures were absolutely outrageous and would have constituted the member getting slapped with a dead trout.

I'm on Normal for my first play-through, but even then, Normal shouldn't be a cakewalk, and it is a cakewalk, lol. At this point, the AI is good--better than most games, and I'm very impressed with the AI, but it's still predictable. Enemy jumps behind a pillar, I strafe around said pillar and blast said enemy. Enemy begins strafing around said pillar, I follow in the opposite direction and blast said enemy. It's just normal combat, nothing special. I'm hoping that Legendary and Heroic actually enhance the AI to the point where it will be an actual challenge from better AI [i]strategy[/i] and not just increased [i]damage[/i] or a [i]torrent[/i] of enemies, because, really...the only reason you have to be careful on the higher difficulties, it seems from your post there, is because there are just stronger and faster enemies, and more of them, not smarter ones. Basically, if I can have smarter enemies and fewer of them and have a challenging game as opposed to "dumb" enemies and thousands of them to get the same kind of gameplay challenge, I'll take the smarter and fewer any day of the week, know what I mean?

Oh hell yes. Venture Bros is one of the reasons I watch Adult Swim (the other reasons being Sealab 2021, Futurama, and the occasional hit of ATHF). It's one of those cartoons that just takes an entire genre of cartoon and shows just how absurd it is. Whether it's the thinly veiled Johnny Quest satire, or outlandish pop culture references/cameos--hell, in a recent episode I saw, Lee Majors (the Six Million Dollar Man) was living with Sasquatch in the Pacific Northwest, and the US Government was hunting them down, effectively ruining Brock's "vacation." I couldn't believe how Brock smuggled them out...lol. While this is going on, we have the Venture Bros and Dr. Venture trapped in their Panic Room back at the mansion, with this assault/security droid pounding on the door, because Dr. Venture was a lazy programmer and didn't yet install the "Friends" Protocols. As if this weren't insane enough, two rival evil empires, The Monarchs and...darn, I forget the other name, are planning an assault on the mansion, but aren't aware that they're both going to be doing it at the same time. They both show up, go "wtf," then don't talk to each other the rest of the night, because apparently, it's in incredibly bad form to not consider the other empire's evil plans, lol. Soon enough, one of the Monarchs go on over and invite the others to have a few drinks and such, and then the individual members start opening up and telling their life sob stories over a few beers. One of the most insane, bizarre, outlandish, and side-splittingly funny cartoons I've seen. I'm really looking forward to Season 1 coming out on DVD eventually.