Brasil

Let's see...first off, awesome story. The dialogue was great, it felt natural, and it was totally entertaining. The juxtaposition of the near philosophical/existential motifs of the dialogue against the modern pop culture-type setting of playing a fighting game works very well. I know I've actually gotten into some odd little discussions while I was playing my high school buds, so that works really well, because you capture that almost perfectly. It's actually really interesting, because, well, one, it reminds me of Calvin and Hobbes, which is always a good thing, and two, it's a good juxtaposition because it makes sense while not making sense. We don't expect teenagers to get into these discussions while they're playing video games, because video games are touted as just mindless entertainment that has no other purpose than to provide social outcasts with activity and to drain brain cells. But in the story, that stereotype and stigma is thrown out the window, and it works, if only because the gamers are actually displaying an understanding of the world around them. Now, for editing. For the most part, I wouldn't change anything at all with the dialogue itself; 90% of it is solid. What I do suggest revising is more spacing than anything else. Make sure there are spaces between each paragraph, and there's one quotation mark missing in there. It's nothing terribly jarring, but it does add some confusion, and I had to re-read it a few times to make sure of who was talking when. Also, in the cases of the interrupted dialogue (What are--don't use Up as a jump--what are you talking about), try using a double dash instead of a singular. It will probably help distinguish the thought a bit. As for the end, I think it's pretty good. I'm not sure how spite has a connection to his accomplishments, though. I like the Bill Gates line, and the Touche is a nice touch. Like Lady A, I really don't see a problem with any of this piece. If there was a problem with the dialogue, pacing, or general execution, I'd have let you know, heh. Dialogue is my forte, I find. All in all...the piece is great. I can't find anything wrong with it, other than the minor structural quibbles.

Atti, a few things you need to keep in mind. This..talk about the dagger...I have no idea why anyone brought it up, because religious inscription or not, [i]it's a dagger[/i]. It's a stabbing weapon. It shouldn't be allowed into school regardless of what is written on it. It's a dangerous object, and can be used violently to physically injure students. It's something that endangers the lives of students there, because it's a weapon. So, right there, it's a moot point, because it shouldn't be in the school to begin with. Those comments about homosexuality and Heaven are hurtful, yes, but they need to be addressed. The students need to understand that intolerance is unacceptable. Religion in school is not the cause of that intolerance, either. The intolerance comes from people applying religion inappropriately. Yes, there is talk in the OT about gays being banished to Hell, etc, but in modern society, that view holds little bearing, and when you hear of talk like that, you need to report it, because intolerance itself is a violation of most school's guidelines. It's harassment above everything else. I'd agree that an off-topic discussion about religion in a Math class is inappropriate, but an English class? Perhaps you aren't aware, but English, History, Philosophy, Art, and Religion are very, very closely intercorrelated. You cannot study one without exploring the others. There are literally thousands of works of Literature that are religious in nature. Augustine's Confessions, Beowulf, Merchant of Venice, Epic of Gilgamesh, The Odyssey, The Iliad, The Bible (yes, the Bible. You do study it here and there in high school), John Milton's Paradise Lost, The Lord of the Flies, The Stranger...these are only off the top of my head, and you'll find many of them on high school syllabi. Regarding 30 people in a class, and the teacher being unable to retain control, that's the case here and there, but I've found that you have to be an utterly incompetent instructor to lose control of your class entirely. I have instructors here at Rutgers who barely--[i]barely[/i] maintain order in a lecture hall of 140 students, and a different instructor has everyone's undivided attention and respect in the same room, with more students. Maintaining control in a controversial topic isn't impossible; it just requires that the instructor know how to handle it.

Zeta, read [url=http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/resident_evil_romero.html][u]George Romero's version of the script[/u][/url]. He works nearly everything from the games into the film, and has it all make sense. His script is only 95 pages, which roughly equates to a 95-minute movie (one page = one minute of screen-time). RE:Apocalypse runs 93 minutes. The first RE script was 120-some pages, which is about two hours screen-time. Now, considering this, how hard would it have been to do the RE game franchise justice by incorporating more than two characters, an enemy or two, and a location into the films? Simply, it would have been easy as hell for a competent writer/director, lol. Anderson did a wonderful job with MK...why did he suddenly drop the ball with RE, and the Alien and Predator franchises, as well? He has absolutely no excuse for writing such a horrible film adaptation, lol, because all he had to do was actually know what he was doing, and know the source material. It's like the review on MSNBC.com's Entertainment section. The reviewer had absolutely no idea what the RE games are, and based her entire opinion of the games themselves (which she never played) on a movie that is based on the games purely through title. Now, [quote=Zeta][spoiler]I really don't think that Jill and Carlos' appearence was brief at all. They were a major part of the movie, just not in the sense they were portrayed in the game. In the game Jill and Carlos get together, as well as in the movie. I myself find them a major part of the movie, had it not been for them, then I could see the movie as not following anything from the games. And if they make another movie, considering the ending leaves open to another movie, you can bet that Jill and Carlos will be big players in it.It isn't hard to see that one coming. I was actually quite surprised that the Nemesis actually followed, and practically fullfilled his programming to destroy the STARS members just like in the game. Again it was done differently in the movie, but it was still following the game. He finds the STARS members, and is programmed to kill them. He does. Now when you look at it closely, he was hunting down the last two STARS members when he killed Peyton on the bridge. It wasn't until after that his main target was Alice. His programming was changed when the Umbrella employess saw Alice there and changed his mission so to speak. The mission of the Nemesis is followed practically to the letter until Alice comes into the picture at that moment. The UBCS and the RPD battles with the zombies are also in there, following that part of the game too. Hell, they even brought the beginning of Resident Evil 3 Nemesis into the movie which was awesome.[/spoiler][/quote] Okay, and this is...three characters and an entire squad of totally incidental characters. The RE games had a cast of much larger than Jill, Carlos, and Nemesis. Why cut the entire rest of the characters? Because... [quote]With any movie, you have to add things to get it a decent length and to be a good movie. Had the things in Apocalypse not been added that had nothing to do with the game, it would have been like what, an hour long? It could possibly have been less.[/quote] But I find it odd how RE:Apocalypse has a nearly identical running time to George Romero's script. Don't you? Romero fit everything into one film...and...it made sense...and he didn't need to take two movies to tell a story that could be told in one. I'm having a hard time here understanding how Anderson's RE can be justified by saying that to make a good movie, when Romero's running time was the exact same. [quote]I know that there are things missing here and there, but they really aren't needed to complete the movie. The movie followed the games quite near to the letter, with only a few things added in, and a few taken out.[/quote] If by "the movie," you mean "Generic Zombie Movie Title #45987," then that would be okay. Fact of the matter is, though, that the movie bears no resemblance to the game, apart from perhaps three characters and a location. I'm still having a hard time seeing how the movies followed the games "quite near to the letter," when very obviously, 85% of the game franchise was totally ignored. You're going to need to clear-up a lot here, lol.

I second what Bio said. The issue here is not about a student bringing in explosives in their bookbag, being determined to committ a suicide bombing, and while Ideological warfare certainly is a less-than-honest procedure of war, I hardly think Ideological warfare/religious propaganda/public disturbance is the intent of most students reading a Bible, Quuran, Torah, etc in a Study Hall. Granted, there may be some who want to convert, but if we're talking about someone who is merely reading a religious book quietly and to themselves, I honestly don't think they're grabbing their neighbor's head and shoving the book in their face. Just the fact that the student is sitting there peacefully is a big sign that they're just reading because they want to, not because they're trying to show others "the light." Under that circumstance, I see no problem at all with letting them read it. If a student or students have a problem with it, then that's an opportunity for the instructor to have a class discussion about it, and educate the class about varying perspectives. Yes, there is legislation that prohibits an instructor from preaching, but as I've learned in my classes here at Rutgers, you can talk and educate about any religion, as long as you don't say, "Religion A is better than Religion B." It simply comes down to being objective when you talk about it, and honestly, because of this, I think much of the controversy surrounding "Religion in schools" is fairly absurd, especially in these innocuous contexts. So a student is reading the Bible to his or herself. So what? So a student is wearing a scarf that's a religious tradition. So what? For those arguing that students having religious items in school, such as a Bible, will cause strife and impede the class' educational progress is missing a key point here: When a student asks about the Bible, the Bible can actually lead into a very educational experience, which means it will not impede educational progress, but rather [i]encourage[/i] intellectual growth. It's not a negative to talk about religion in school. It just isn't. It becomes negative when it gets out of hand, or when it's not discussed objectively. Ultimately, [i]that's[/i] the issue here: religion becoming an issue because it isn't handled appropriately.

I just finished watching Birth of the Lightsaber, and a lot more of the Prequels/OT make a lot more sense now. I think the explanation for the saber differences also applies to the ships, actually, even though clearly, the better look of the Prequels is due to better technology, there still is a plot-related correlation. Lucas was telling the story of how the sabers were built and such, and talked about the various stances and styles throughout the films. In the OT, he explains, Luke's style is relatively basic, because nobody is really teaching him, apart from some minor instruction from Obi-Wan and perhaps some from Yoda. Other than that, however, he's teaching himself in a time where all Jedi are extinct, so he's getting no formal training, really. When you look at the Prequels, with the insane acrobatics and such, it's because those fights were taking place in a time where Jedi were fully trained, and their abilities were finely honed. That's why Darth Maul vs Qui-Gon/Obi-Wan is so much more intense physically than Luke vs Vader in ESB or RotJ. The emotional effect is greater, though, in the OT, as Lucas admits, because it's a much more personal fight. In Episodes I and II, the majority of the fights weren't as personal as say, what we'll see in Episode III, or in RotJ. Lucas actually made a comparison between the Luke/Vader fight in ESB and their second duel in RotJ, noting how there's much more at stake in RotJ. It makes sense. I've screengrabbed a few images from a few of the documentaries. Really neat stuff. I especially like that concept art of Darth Vader. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21078&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21079&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21080&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21081&stc=1[/img]

I was giggling when I popped in A New Hope, then I got choked up. The DVD cases alone are absolutely beautiful. They look glorious. The cover art for each film is just unbelievably gorgeous, it really is. The sound and picture is awesome, I'm sure. My computer isn't really the best for stuff like that, because my monitor distorts the picture, and my amp to my sound system is starting to go, so the sound kept cutting in and out. Also, I was watching it around midnight, so I couldn't blast the volume. Melissa has so graciously agreed to sit down and watch the Trilogy with me on Friday night, so we'll get to see the DVDs on a big screen with digital surround sound. I'll report on that when I get there. ^_^ The extras are damn nice. I watched the Preview for Episode III: The Return of Darth Vader, and my favorite part of that little preview was probably [spoiler]when Hayden Christiansen finally donned the suit and walked out onto the set. They have this shot of a stage-hand or someone, and her hand is covering her mouth as her eyes have that "I'm about to cry" look to them.[/spoiler] The look at McGregor and Christiansen practicing the duel is very neat. They're really getting into it. After watching the Preview, I'm very, very psyched about Episode III and I'm respecting Christiansen a lot more, because he's taking such a huge interest in the Episode III game, actually being heavily involved in the lightsaber fight choreography and being able to explain things in gamer terms, because apparently, he's a big gamer himself. My only criticisms of the DVD set still are identical to my initial criticisms. The Jabba scene is still unnecessary and is just so redundant considering Greedo says everything before. The Greedo scene is better now, and the dodge looks better, thankfully. I went frame by frame (because I'm a loser) and Greedo shoots first (you can only tell going frame by frame), but I really like how Han shoots twice after that, lol. So, Han's still a bad mutha and a cold-hearted one at that. I've not yet checked out Empire of Dreams; I'll probably do that tonight. The still galleries are awesome, and there are some neat tidbits about Hoth here and there. Apparently, there was going to be a Wampa Ice Creature scene or two in the Rebel base, where the Wampas escape and start wreaking havoc. It was discarded when they realized it couldn't be done, but it's cool we get to see that in Shadows of the Empire on N64. As you can guess, no fan should be without these DVDs. They're what Star Wars fans have been waiting for: a comprehensive, digitally remastered Ultimate Edition of the Original Trilogy of Star Wars.

[quote name='Zidargh']Is it possible to still enjoy it quite a bit when playing it offline?[/quote] [b][i]YES.[/i][/b] Dear God, yes. And just so I don't spam, lol, I had a chance to play the Demo of it included with the OT DVD set, and I must have burned about 2 hours playing it. You only get one level in the Demo, Endor, but it's fun as hell. There's a Co-Op mode in there, I believe, and a Counter-Op mode seems likely, so playing it Offline is peachy keen. ^_^

In this particular instance, though, I don't think religion or outdated material is remotely close to the cause of this 7th grader's musical difficulties. It's a middle school music class. There are going to be some sore spots. That's just how it is. I know. I went through years of music classes in high school, and also did things with the middle schools. The girl sitting next to you is not stupid, and calling her stupid simply because she's struggling with a musical instrument is...despicable, in my opinion. And instead of bitching and moaning about it, or making fun of her, or so vehemently criticizing her, why not help her? She obviously does need some assistance in the class. I just fail to see how a lack of musical ability automatically translates into someone being stupid. Playing an instrument is hard work, and takes years of practice to be able to do it well. My high school buds didn't get where they are by playing every few months. As for the more general issue...I don't really think anyone is getting dumber or smarter. For the most part, you'll find that student behaviors and abilities are roughly equal to preceeding classes. Now, there is a greater presence of negative behaviors (drinking, smoking, sex, etc), and that is a problem. But nobody is getting "stupider."

Oops. Yeah, Calvin's six. Thanks, Godel. I can read the 10th Anniversary Collection and always find something new in there. Whether it's a particular bit of dialogue that really stands out, or Watterson's commentary on various aspects of cartooning or Calvin and Hobbes, I'm continually "wowed." One strip in particular, actually, really hit me. I find that Watterson is one of those cartoonists who don't have to use dialogue at all to effectively tell a story. Like he says in his notes, comics are a visual medium, but even the visuals can't replace the dialogue--that is, great writing can save poor visuals, and likewise, great visuals can save poor writing. But what happens when the only bits of dialogue are at the end, and could be simple one-liners? The "Summer Days Always Seem So Short" strip shows Watterson's skill with visuals to tell the story. Throughout the strip, we're shown fantastic scenes of childhood summer, Calvin and Hobbes exploring, running through the woods, checking out bugs, digging for dinosaur bones, scavenger hunts, even catching fireflies. This alone would be a terrific collection of images, but Calvin and Hobbes' dialogue in the very last panel clinches the theme of childhood summer: "Why does it always seem like summer days are so short?" "I know what you mean. We didn't even get to half of our itinerary." It's just awesome, and I think it's one of the best examples of how Calvin and Hobbes taps into our own childhoods. Its themes are timeless and universal in the world of a 6-year-old. ^_^ And don't forget, Shin, as Calvin explains his lackluster grades, "You know how Einstein flunked Math, well my grades are WORSE!"

I'm simply going to number the points, as my attention span is quite low right now, and Windows is behaving badly. So, here we go. If I sound harsh, well...oh well, lol. I'm curt because I don't have the time to coat things in honey. 1) Blizzi sounds like she wants nothing to do with you at all. 2) She seems like she doesn't want to speak to you. 3) You got yourself in way, way too deep, as the feelings were and are not mutual. Your affection for Blizzi is unrequited. Say hi to Petrarch. 4) It doesn't sound like Blizzi was ever interested to begin with. 5) I don't know what kind of gift could cost 500 dollars, but I would never spend 500 dollars on a girl I don't even know. Yes, I've treated my girlfriend to a weekend down the shore at a nice Bed and Breakfast that did cost me around 550 to 600, but I knew what I was in, and I knew it was a secure relationship. Most importantly, I knew the love was mutual. So, that's a major snag here. Spending large amounts of money on a girl that barely acknowledges your existence is setting yourself up for trouble. CONCLUSION: Basically...forget about her. Sounds cold, but I've been in similar situations in the past, years ago, and pursuing her is only going to hurt you, her, and everyone involved. Kevin, I'd offer sympathy, but you've kind of painted yourself into a corner, which makes it incredibly hard to step out without getting your feet dirty. Blizzi's gone. Accept it and move on. I think that's the best advice you can hear. Just move on with your life.

The following post was written whilst consuming some Yuengling Lager, so let's see how alcohol affects my posting quality. I'd like to focus on Tourneys, actually. While the individual goals of the gamer (unlocking everything, maxing out play-time, getting the fastest times, etc) are good points of discussion, it seems to me that the best assessment for judging a player's attitude towards a game is when they are placed into a competitive situation. I'd actually use my Pittsburgh trip as a reference point (incidentally, the gaming society there, OGS, has recently sent out an email about a major LAN Explosion Extravaganza to be held in early October, by the way, so I'm hoping to get out there for that). I think it's safe to say that every gamer is a competitive gamer in some way. Whether that gamer is merely playing against his siblings, like Shinny here and like myself on occasion, or the gamer is participating in a large, 40-person Melee Tourney, they are still incredibly competitive. Also, I think most competitive gamers are competitive because it's fun. There's a very awesome thrill and exhilaration at walking into a TV lounge and hopping right in to an 8-player Double Dash LAN game, and the same can be said when the Melee Tourney begins. With the right people, it's insanely fun. I know from experience, hehe. But when does it stop being fun and just become tedious in Tourneys? The answer is simple. When the trash-talking starts...and this trash-talking shouldn't be misconstrued as the fun and goofy stuff we see in OB Literati games, either. The trash-talking that sucks the fun out of gaming, in my opinion, is when that trash-talking is nothing more than virulent and mean-spirited verbal rubbish. I mean, how is it fun when your opponent is going, "You ************* *****...you ******* suck. I'm going to rip your ******* lungs out, you puny little worm" and they actually mean it? At that point, the game isn't worth playing with them. Games are designed to be a social event, yes, but the social event shouldn't be negative, and that brand of "gamer hating" is fairly similar to AW's "get back at Bob who humiliated you in front of a group of people" comment. Those types of attitudes are simply just vindictive and are signs of people who play for the wrong reasons, and I [i]do[/i] think there [i]are[/i] wrong reasons to play games. Games are meant to be fun, and having a whiner or...the term is "griefer," I believe, in terms of Online MMORPGs, cheapens the experience. So, to answer your question, AW, I feel that a game is no longer fun primarily when the human element degenerates. Yes, tedious game design and content is always an issue, but it's far more aggravating to have a griefer playing against you.

I've done my fair share of stretchy comparisons in the past, but this comparison is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read in my life, and I've read quite a few utterly ludicrous comparative papers. Just the notion of comparing Mussolini, who is a [i]Fascist Dictator[/i], to someone like Rudy Guiliani, who became [i]NYC's savior[/i] after 9/11, should immediately tip you off that the comparison is bunk, lol. This entire 14-point comparison is laughable, and the basis for those 14 points is ridiculous. The authors are trying to draw a strong comparison between totally innocent actions of Guiliani (the investigation into a baseball series streaker) and Mussolini's connection to Fascist thugs and mobsters? [i]C'mon[/i], lol. The entire thing is either the biggest mistake ever written, or the worst excuse for satire I've ever read. EDIT: To put it simply and bluntly, this comparison is like me arguing that ALF wasn't an alien.

[quote name='Midnight Rush']we as Americans need the most heartless, nastiest S.O.B in the country to pull us through.[/quote]You do realize that Richard Nixon nearly doomed our country? His methods were quite possibly the most unsound executions I've ever read about. No country should have a president like Nixon, who is undeniably one of the nastiest and most heartless S.O.Bs in American history. If not for some serious investigation by third-party reporters, Nixon could have inflicted far more damage than he did. Had Nixon stayed in power, I strongly believe that Watergate and his mis-management of Vietnam would have been the tip of the iceberg. In order for America to survive, I think a cold-hearted and ruthless bastard is the [i]last[/i] thing we need, quite honestly. We don't need a Terminator; we need Merkin Muffley (from Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove).

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]He's hardly the only one who's suffering from this. I'm not a Kerry fan, but I think it's absolutely despicable that people are maligning his war record. Moreover, polls show that the Swift Boat ads have actually been quite effective--which I find astonishing, considering that they're baseless as well as completely tasteless. Yeah, I know liberals like to jump all over Bush. However, his people have done more than their share of mud-slinging: just look what happened to John McCain during the 2000 Republican primaries. The Bush team pulled some incredibly dirty tricks back then, and remembering that makes it impossible for me to feel particularly sympathetic when they're on the receiving end. ~Dagger~[/QUOTE] And that's what I'm saying, Dagger--asking, rather. How are partisan politics helping America? We constantly see attacks from both sides, we see attacks from Hollywood...they're coming from everywhere. Is that supposed to give us faith in our government leaders? lol I mean, when we're hearing of the Candidates themselves both ripping the other to shreds, in front of their respective rallies filled with their respective party supporters, what are we supposed to believe? By that I mean, when both candidates are putting their worst faces forward by trying to sling mud into their opponents' faces, is that going to inspire confidence in the electoral system? I'm being naive, I'm sure, but I think we seriously need a major overhaul of the system itself, heh...get a fresh start, forget about partisan politics...hell, maybe SNL had something there back in 2000, when they had The Odd Couple skit starring both George Dubya and Al Gore sharing the Presidency and the White House.

Just hyperspace jumping in here to thank those who already Signed-up, and to let everyone know that Sign-ups are still open. I really like what I've seen so far; much of it has been incredibly good, and I'm especially happy to see such a diversity in the Sign-ups, even though they're still sticking to the Sign-up guidelines. ^_^

In part, this question pertains to the "questionable" events of 9/11, when Bush apparently decided to stay in a pre-school classroom and read a children's book to the students there, instead of zipping out on his plane and...I don't know...support the country? After reading about Michael Moore using an enlarged copy (READ: gigantic) of My Pet Goat at his little entertainment concert at the Tweeter Center, I can't help but ask, "What's the big deal about it?" I mean, what is so wrong with simply finishing a story in a preschool classroom, even though your country is under attack? I just can't see how that's still such a huge issue...hell, I can't even see how it was a huge issue back then, really. Bush stayed for 7 minutes after his aides informed him in the classroom. 7 minutes. That's less than 15. I can't even shower in 7 minutes. How is his staying there and finishing the story a bad thing? How does that color him to be some evil guy, or legitimize criticisms of him? I'm not defending him, but I'm just trying to see why people got their panties so much in a twist. And, perhaps to open this up to a wider range of topics, why is Bush villified, anyway (for that matter, why is Kerry villified)? Sure, he's done some questionable things (i.e., War on Terror), but I can't think of any President who hasn't done something bad...maybe Jimmy Carter, but that's all I can think of in the past 40 years. I dislike Bush, sure, and I also dislike Kerry. I'm not a fan of either party, to be honest, but I just can't see how this entire thing (Bush-bashing, Kerry-bashing, Michael Moore) is any different than schoolyard recess bullies getting upset over Dodgeball. Can someone please explain this to me? Am I missing something here, some huge and groundbreaking piece of news that will shatter everything I know, or is the American political system really nothing more than a huge game of Dodgeball gone wrong?

You are sitting in the computer lab, but you're not really paying attention to those around you. Granted, you hear them type, like that student hammering on the keyboard to your right, and you hear people rocking in their chair. Farther in the room, you hear the printer whirring as it spits out page after page of Electronic Reserve materials, and the collection bin there quickly amasses upwards of seventy useless pages of various computer coding and electronic gibberish. But that doesn't matter, because you're browsing the Internet, checking out sports highlights, news reports, and sometimes browsing messageboards. What an interesting thread. You are tempted to post in it, to add your voice to an already screaming electronic population. You're in your own little world, a digital non-reality that caters to whatever you may desire, an electronic empire that you can do anything in, because there are no rules on-line. A bag is dropped down next to you, breaking you out of your stupor, jacking you out of your digitized universe. The jolt back to reality is a harsh one, and you jump out of your chair, and simultaneously turn your head to see who now sits next to you, logging in to the network. "Sorry," he says in a gruff chuckle. You gaze into his eyes. They're a fiery red, embedded in a rough and almost leathery face. His five o'clock shadow is darker than most, and his hair is the color of night, mildly silky but trimmed short. "It-it's okay," you stammer, and go back to your browsing. "I'm Shawn, by the way," he says, and you turn again to see his right hand open for an introduction. "Oh, I'm Lisa," you respond, and force the strongest handshake you can muster, because your hands have suddenly gone weak. After you shake hands with Shawn, you go back to browsing. Another moment of silence passes and then, "So, what year are you," he asks. "Sophomore," you reply. "Cool," he says. "What about you?" "Well, I'm sort of in-between grades at the moment. I'm not a Junior and I'm not a Senior...guess I'm stuck in Limbo, heh." You laugh. Shawn has a nice sense of humor. "What's your Major," you ask. "Me? Don't have one." "You don't have one?" "Nah. I just never saw the point. I mean, here you go through some four or five years, locked into one subject and for what? A degree, yeah, but what if after a few years, you realize you don't like what you've chosen?" "Well, I don't know...choose something else," you respond. "You could, sure, but you'd be thousands of dollars in the hole, and then have to start all over again." "I guess." "Why not enjoy it while you're there, and just have fun?" "I don't know..." "Hey, it's not as if I'm going to have no direction in my life forever, you know? I'm just making sure to savor these years, not hyperfocus on one thing. It's like this: what happens when you concentrate on one thing? You ignore everything else, right?" "That makes sense, I guess." "Haha, of course it makes sense," Shawn laughs, "I'm just a sensible guy." He flashes you a big, toothy grin and you can't help but smile back. "I guess so, Shawn." "But what about you? What Major are you locked into?" "Well, I'm not totally sure yet, but I think I want to do something with maybe English or History." "Any ideas other than that? Are you going to teach?" "I don't know. I might." "Cool. The world needs more teachers, that's what I always say. The education system isn't too good right now. We need more people in there." "Definitely," you reply. "I used to want to teach, you know?" "Really?" "Yeah. Back a few years ago, I would sit in the classroom, look at the teacher and think, 'you know, I could definitely get into that. It looks like fun.'" "What happened? Why didn't you?" "Eh, just wasn't my thing. I'm good with kids and people and all, but I guess I just don't have the drive for it. You might call me lazy, I guess." "I don't think you're lazy." "Heh, you're sweet for saying that," he responds. "No, I'm serious. You're smart, fun...you just don't want to committ to something you're not sure about...I don't see a problem with that." "Really?" "Yes, really. All my life, I've always tried to have a goal in mind, and in high school, it worked, because there wasn't so much to be distracted by. But here, it seems that what I've wanted to do is only a really small part of what's out there. I guess I'm just kind of scared." "Ah, don't be. Don't look at it as you're only experiencing a small part of things. Think of it like there's so much out there and you could do anything...hell, you could do it all, if you wanted." "Oh?" "Yeah. Think about it. We're only seeing the tip of the iceberg, but icebergs are huge things, so there's so much more out there than just what we see, and we should embrace that. Live the world, experience it. Get what I'm saying?" "...yes, I think I do...even though everything seems so daunting, it really isn't, because it seems a certain way because..." "...because you've been brought up to see it a certain way. You've got it," as he smiles again, "you feel scared because you've been told to be scared. Look at what the school system is like. You've got third-grade teachers telling you how hard fourth-grade is going to be, and you've got fourth-grade teachers telling you that fifth-grade is going to be like Hell, which it isn't. I know from experience." "I see what you're saying." "You're really nice, has anyone ever told you that?" You laugh. "No, they haven't." "What a crime. They should. You're a great gal, Lisa. Oh, I've got to run...I've got a meeting with a prof in the Philosophy department. Hopefully I'll see you again?" "Definitely." "Cool. Catch you later." He gathers his books and dashes out of the computer lab, leaving his chair slightly spinning. You go back to browsing the messageboard, and glance over to his terminal. He forgot to log out. You move the mouse over SHUTDOWN and click it. "Logging Out ShawnF66" appears briefly then vanishes as the computer restarts itself for the next user. You finish on your computer, log out, and walk outside to enjoy the beautiful day. --- Just finished it. Took me about an hour or so. What does everyone think?

Hopefully that POW block is hittable. I'd love to see some good ole fashioned POW earthquakes going on. Hell, I'm hoping all of those little 2D cretins can be hit.

[QUOTE=James][color=#707875]Supposedly action? Again, there's no source or reference for that. lol We don't know the genre and Square-Enix hasn't mentioned it. We have no video nor any playable software to make our judgement on. We [i]only[/i] have screenshots.[color=black][/quote][/color] [color=#000000][quote]The latest issue of Japan's Jump Magazine contains first information on an action game starring FFVII vampire character Vincent Valentine. The game, Final Fantasy VII: Dirge of Cerberus.[/quote][/color] [color=#000000]I just looked at the article we were linked to, lol. That's why I mentioned "supposedly action," because there isn't any confirmation, but it being an action title seems to be the general direction, based on initial reactions.[/color] [color=black][QUOTE][/color]So, like I mentioned before, this game could play like DMC, or it might play like Jet Set Radio, or it might play like Space Channel 5 or god knows what else. Obviously that's a bit of an exaggeration, but, third person visuals and guns don't necessarily dictate the gameplay genre -- they only really influence the visual style (and we've already seen Vincent in third person, with a gun in Final Fantasy VII, which was an RPG and not an action title.)[/color][color=black][/QUOTE] [/color] I agree that guns are visual, but I don't think they [i]only[/i] really influence the visual style. I think they're more than that, actually. In games I've played, having the character holding a gun usually isn't simply designed to make them look cool or anything. Often, the gun does have a use: to kill things, to provide firepower, to affect gameplay. Ratchet and Clank use quite a few different weapons, as do Jak and Daxter, and while those guns do add to the aesthetics of the game, they also serve a purpose from a gameplay standpoint. The guns in Earthworm Jim also provide more than just a visual, except for the Bubble Gun, which really is useless, lol. I don't think many can debate the usefulness of the Plasma Gun or the Darn Barn Blaster when killing enemies. Even in DMC, the guns were utilized as more than a flashy "I'm Dante and I wield dual pistols named Ebony and Ivory. I'm damn cool-looking." You couldn't kill a long-range enemy with the sword, and thus you would switch to the firearms. That seems gameplay-oriented in addition to visually-oriented. And yes, we've already seen Vincent in third-person, when he debuted in FFVII, but like you said, that was an RPG, which bears little resemblance to third-person action titles, FPS, stealth-action, platformers, etc. But, the utilization of those guns is fairly conventional in FFVII, during battles. Vincent uses the pistols as his weapon. They aren't just a window-dressing; they're the tools he uses throughout the game. [color=#707875][color=black][QUOTE][/color][color=#707875]But don't you see how that makes absolutely no sense? lol What are you really judging it on? You're judging it based on how Vincent looks. But as I've frequently pointed out, Vincent was around long before Dante. Yet nobody was comparing DMC to Final Fantasy VII. You simply can't base your assumption of the game's genre based on the aesthetic of the main character. Vincent is an established character, he didn't just arrive yesterday. He is not mimmicking Dante. Any comparison between Dante and Vincent is purely coincidental at this point.[/color][/color][color=black][/QUOTE] [/color] [color=black]But I never said he was mimmicking Dante, and I never implied that the character of Vincent was something of a copyright infringement on the design of Dante. Honestly, I don't care at all if they're cut from the same mold or whatever. Similarities between the two characters do not matter to me, just like I couldn't care less about the similarities between Mario and Luigi.[/color] [color=black] [/color] [color=black]Perhaps I should have explained what I meant by "gothic." When Vincent is telling us about Lucrecia, and how his life has been filled with trauma, pain, suffering, etc, his story and characterization are heavily gothic. If we were to examine gothic literature, we would find similar experiences there. By "gothic literature," I am referring to 1764 to 1840.[/color] [color=black] [/color] [color=black]I'm not basing anything, really, on Vincent's "look." I'm basing it on his character, gameplay execution from previous games (the combat, for example, his guns), and what we've seen in screenshots, which does more and more bear resemblance to an action title, albeit one with some stealth apparently thrown in.[/color] [color=#707875][color=black][quote][/color]What have we read about it that bears any relationship to DMC? lol. Nothing. There's nothing at all about the game that indicates that, on any substantive basis. The only thing that even remotely hints at it is the third person, the gun and the look of Vincent. But again, Vincent was around long before Dante. And there are many third person games in many genres.[color=black][/quote][/color] [color=black]And again, I'm not saying Vincent May Cry simply because the characters look similar, lol. They dress alike, so what? They have the same eyes, big deal. They share gameplay characteristics? Now, that's interesting.[/color] [color=black][quote][/color]Sheesh. ~_^[/color][/QUOTE]Hehe. ~_^ But I am getting interested about this game, and while my "Vincent May Cry" sounds like I'm writing it off, it's just a fun way of referring to it...keeps me interested in the game, lol. I especially like one of the later screenshots Tony supplied us with, the one of Vincent hiding behind a crate or something.

Kane, again, very good question. The sign-ups are going to be used as a sample, and then I will place the characters. However, the minor characters I've spoken of, the Stormtroopers, Officers, Citizens, etc, are not going to be specific characters at all (players don't need to worry about "creating" a character). Shy and I have talked about it, and he suggested that locking players into those specific characters might not be the most useful approach to this RPG. My take on it is this. With players creating specific characters, we may get most of them based on Tatooine, which would make them essentially useless when we're talking about the Old Republic on Coruscant. Also, with the same characters being repeated, the RPG will become stagnant, because we're not getting much variety in the interviews/narratives/etc. So, instead of fitting the RPG to the characters, I'm fitting the characters to the RPG, in that the characters will flow out of the story itself, instead of the story being structured around the characters. Obviously, Tarkin, Vader, and Palpatine will still be prominent figures, and I will probably have someone play them entirely when we delve into their histories and such, but the minor characters will be based on the needs of the RPG as it proceeds. I hope I explained that more fully. If you're still unsure, feel free to reply here. AU is neat. :)

I'd actually list KOTOR I as a timeless game for me. I start playing it again after a few months, and I still really, really enjoy it, and it still feels really fresh, even though I've gone through it a few times now. I don't know what it is about it, but it just hits me each time I play. KOTOR is really just a really good game, I guess. I suppose, too, that since I've never played through it going fully Dark Side, maxing out the Dark Side powers, I'm really enjoying it on this replay. After I beat KOTOR as full Dark Side, I'm going to start another file and do a pseudo-minimalist route, only doing level-ups when I achieve Jedi status, so I can fully max out on the Dark Side powers, hehe. It seems to me that the more open-ended a game is, or at least the higher replayability it has, the more timeless it becomes. KOTOR, Metroid Prime, SMB...these are games that you can enjoy again and again, because they're done so well that you want to replay them.

I'm not sure what others are basing their reactions on, James, but the "look" of the game really has nothing to do with my reaction, heh. I'm simply considering what we [i]have[/i] been given here: the game is going to be third-person perspective. It features Vincent from FFVII. Vincent uses guns. He is a gothic character. The game is supposedly an action game. It's coming out on PS2. Unless Square-Enix totally revamps his character, giving him a daisy and a sack of hugs, and placing him smack-dab in the middle of a flowered meadow full of posies, I don't think the immediate comparisons to DMC are all that ridiculous, really. Yes, it's incredibly early and all, and we do have very, very minute details about the game, but the info we do have could certainly point to at least a DMC-esque entry. Based on what we've seen/read here, it seems certainly possible, and everyone does have their assessment of the actual DMC series, so it's only natural that those assessments would affect their reaction to Vincent May Cry, since what we've read about Dirge of Cerberus could certainly point to a DMC starring Vincent. Until we do know more, I don't think we can write-off any assessment of the game at this point.

[quote name='Lord Eliwood']There is absolutely no question about it. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City.[/quote] No question about it? Really? [quote]It was an overrated, overstuffed game with[/quote] Overstuffed? What, [i]too much[/i] content? Too many things to do? Too many weapons? Too many options? [QUOTE]clunky controls[/QUOTE] I'd agree that the controls needed work, but in most reviews I've read, they mention how the controls were vastly improved from III, and how while the controls aren't perfect, they're pretty manageable once you play the game enough, so..."clunky" or not, I certainly think the controls are designed well enough at least so the player can grow accustomed to them. Obviously, jumping in GTA 3D was always an issue, and one they do need to fix, and aiming vertically has never been quite dead-on, but in the larger scheme of things, those control issues seem relatively minor blemishes for the game. [quote]bad graphics[/quote] Apart from a few collision detection issues, and a frame hiccup here and there, pop-up, and an occasional clipping, I think the graphics capture Downtown Miami pretty darn well. The sunsets are, in my opinion, absolutely gorgeous, with the way the glow of orange, red, and yellow sets the night sky ablaze, and how you can see seagulls flying overhead, as the palm trees sway in the wind. The outfits and costumes are ridiculous, and rightly so. It's the 80s. I, for one, love the feel and look of Vice City. The aesthetics are awesome. [quote]and the only reason most people liked it was because it was GTA III with the city moved around a bit, and GTA had credibility.[/quote] I've found that regardless of what city I'm in in GTA, I'm playing the game for the fun dialogue, fun missions, content, and most importantly, [i]the radio[/i]. The GTA III/Vice City radio is one of the best I've ever heard in any game, simply because it's done so well. I've literally parked the car somewhere pleasant and turned on the chat station, or the hard rock one, and just sat and listened for an hour or two. For most people, I don't think their attraction to GTA was simply because it was III with the "city moved around a bit." I think most gamers enjoyed Vice City because it was simply a good game, albeit a bit simplistic at parts. But, when you look at the series itself, apart from the 3D, the entire series has always been like that, so I don't think criticizing Vice City alone is very valid. [quote]Also I only see people play it with cheats. Where's the fun and challenge in that?[/quote] How is that supposed to make the game overrated? [quote]I'm pretty sure San Andreas will be massively overrated, too.[/quote] We'll see when it's released. [quote]Maybe I just don't get it, but I am not a GTA fan.[/QUOTE] I think you just don't "get it."

Vincent May Cry? EDIT: Haha, just read the article. Yep. Vincent May Cry. :p

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Well, if we're going along these lines, then heck yeah the films messed up pretty badly. Resident Evil, of all video game franchises (along with Silent Hill, Doom, and Half-Life), allows for a truly SCARY movie. It can be downright creepy, like that shark room in the first RE game for Gamecube. On top of that, it allows for cool actions scenes because you can make neat Tyrant-ish monsters. The films completely failed to deliver on the creepy/scary level and tripped all over themselves with the action.[/quote] [i]Precisely[/i]. [quote]To anyone who, in defense of RE's crappiness, says "it's based on a game, people!" it's actually unfair to have such low standards for "movies based on video games." Give Resident Evil to Bryan Singer, and he'd show you why, lol.[/QUOTE] I'd prefer to have Romero doing RE, quite honestly. He's the granddaddy of the zombie flick, and he is a much more competent director than Singer. X2 was on HBO earlier tonight, and it was only mildly amusing at parts...the rest was just a myriad of lousy plot points, underdeveloped characters, acting, story, etc. Singer gets it right here and there, but when he happens to get it right, it's too few and far between, and that's not what RE would need, I think. For a good RE movie that stays true to both the games and the zombie premise, Romero is the guy to call, and he was the guy they called first. Why he didn't do it is beyond me. I mean, it's Resident Evil...a zombie flick.