Charles

Here are some pics of Snake in Smash Brothers: [CENTER][IMG]http://www.smashbros.com/en/characters/chara5/img/photo_l2.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER] [CENTER][IMG]http://www.smashbros.com/en/characters/chara5/img/photo_l3.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]

[quote name='Khonsu Bomb']Or maybe a site where you can take them and edit them or something... I dunno, I seem to remember my cousin using a site like that. PM me if you do. Thankies![/quote] [CENTER][IMG]http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/8912/pieman106aa0fo.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]

Not guilty. [B]I behave[/B]: Of or relating to the intellect. Rational rather than emotional. [B]I[/B]: Appeal to or engage the intellect: an intellectual book; an intellectual problem. [B]I[/B]: Have or show intellect, especially to a high degree. [B]I am[/B]: n. An intellectual person.

[QUOTE=xliquidousx][COLOR=Purple]Okay, the rules for this game thread are simple: you answer the previous poster's question with a question. I'll begin. Does everyone understand this rule?[/COLOR][/QUOTE] [center][img]http://img324.imageshack.us/img324/5484/bsmeter5dw6od.gif[/img][/center]

[URL=http://www.justfuckinggoogleit.com/]http://www.justgoogleit.com/[/URL]

[quote name='Obesepanda']I was suprised they went that way with the series, Messing with game mechanics can spell disaster especially with a game like mario, alot of people like the whole 2d side scrolling image of the game im sure no one will bicker to much but you never know.[/quote] They didn't mess with the game mechanics; they did the opposite. The game plays [i]exactly[/i] like a mixture between the first and third Super Mario Bros. games with a pinch of Super Mario World (storing an item and revolving on cages). The mid-boss battles play out a lot like Mario Bros. 3; even the Hammer Brothers wander around the world maps. The primary differences are a few new power-ups and the addition of a couple moves from Mario 64 (the butt stomp and the wall jump). So yeah, this game is very retro. The 3D character models mainly make an aesthetic difference. Anyway, I'm happy with the game. I would never call it Super Mario 4 because that would take away from what Mario 64 did for the series. I think that was the natural evolution of Mario. This game, most definitely, is a throwback and it "feels" right. New Super Mario Bros manages to mesh well with the classic Mario side scrollers; that's a huge accomplishment in and of itself. At first I was disappointed with the art direction. I thought the game looked very boring--almost like a fan-made project. And it did. I was also disappointed with how short the levels were, and how easy the game seemed. But boy, let me tell you, once I unlocked some of the later worlds things picked up [i]big time.[/i] There's some truly inventive platforming mechanics in some levels. Not only did the level design and difficulty end up achieving a classic Mario look and feel, in some ways it surpassed it. For example, the butt stomp and wall-jump moves compliment the gameplay so well, that it would be hard for me to go back to the earlier games. Additionally, [spoiler]whether you're riding on the back of a giant centipede or swimming past huge eels, it's just [i]awesome.[/i] [/spoiler] I almost felt like I was a kid again while playing through it. Also, the placement of the three gold coins is often brilliant. Although I was able to get through the game quickly, it's actually fun just to go back and collect them all for the sake of the challenge alone. The secret exits and unlockable worlds also gave me a lot of reason to go back and explore. Again, just really well done stuff here. So yeah, New Super Mario Bros. isn't as stylish as I would have hoped and I would have liked some cool power suits (I grew tired of the fire flower) but regardless, this is a great handheld Mario side scroller that craps on most of today's 3D platformers. I have to rank it right alongside Mario Bros. 3. It's that good. I just hope that Artoon doesn't screw up Yoshi's Island 2.

Hey animetruth. I had a twin brother named Kyle. On our way home from a club there was a car wreck and Kyle passed away. We were alike in pretty much every way. We did everything together and even had the same celtic knot tatoo on our biceps. We were both writers and even both drive Integra's; the only difference was he was married I wasn't. When Kyle died it was the worst thing that could have ever happened. When we were lying in that ditch upside down Kyle made me promise that I'd never let his wife know what it'd be like to lose someone and that if Elizabeth, his wife, knew he was dead she'd probably kill herself too. Elizabeth is a fantastic girl in pretty much every way. She's been with my brother for years. The only downside to Elizabeth is she is very manic depressive. Kyle basically saved her from suicide and gave her hope again. The two are so dynamic together you'd never guess Elizabeth was so much different before. After the wreck I did what Kyle asked and pretty much became him. I took his job, I drove his car, even his grave stone has my name on it so Elizabeth wouldn't know, much to the chagrin of my mother. It sounds crazy but I had to do it, for Kyle. At first it was awkward with Elizabeth but I just hid everything under the guise of grieving for my brother. Now things are pretty ok. Elizabeth is happy and I hope Kyle is happy knowing this. Things for me though have hit a snag. Elizabeth wants to have a child. It would be the final step to becoming Kyle 100% though in my mind. To look down at my child and have it call me by someone else's name? I don't know if I can go that final step. Sometimes I just want to freak out and tell Elizabeth everything, but then I look at my arm and see my tatoo and I know that's not what I promised Kyle and I carry on. I don't know if I can carry on like this forever though. If we do have this child I'm pretty much going to have to be Kyle until I die. Can I do this animetruth? How will I find the strength to keep up this lie forever? I don't know what to do anymore.

There are two posts and still no one has even spelled "betrayal" correctly. haha I can see why you feel betrayed but you really weren't. There doesn't seem to be any dishonesty involved. Your friends were apparently disloyal but they weren't false. In fact, it seems like your friends were incredibly upfront with you. Instead of gossiping behind your back or trying to humiliate you, they just told you straight up that they don't want to spend time with you. The question is: why?

Oh man, this is beyond bad. I remember there being a "Caption Contest" in Otaku Lounge; that's spammy, unfunny and bad enough. I think I would actually like to see some of this energy going into actual gaming discussion. So, this thing's had its run. Let's give it a rest for a while, and for a while I mean forever. [center][img]http://aworkforce.org/ccreports/lassen/LassenJune05/closed_sign.jpg[/img][/center]

I saw the E3 trailer and had mixed feelings. On one hand, as a young boy I loved the films. So, the Jaws franchise is always going to stir up some nostalgia. I even remember playing, and beating, the incredibly weird NES game. The game itself looked like it might be good fun. I watched and re-watched the part where Jaws was mauling someone while a poorly-rendered onlooker was screaming. The game looks and sounds very campy as it ought to. And, I was definitely happy to see him ramming through glass. I just wonder how entertaining it will be in the long run, and how well they'll resolve the camera issues that are very visible when Jaws comes into contact with architecture.

I'm confused as to what's going on here exactly. Is there an actual custody battle being fought or are you uncomfortable with your daughter being around his home-wrecking wife? In any case, it seems like your ex-husband is trying to convince you that this woman would make a better mother than you. He emphasizes that Connie cares about your daughter as if she was her own and then tries to tear down your capability as a mother by throwing up her experience. But, come on. If we were talking about Home Depot here those eleven months would be relevant. However, we're not talking about a typical "job" at all. As the child's natural mother no other woman is better-suited to mother your daughter. Especially if she ends up having a personality like yours. You hold a natural, intimate connection to your daughter that this woman never can. So, she'll never be able to take your place. Anyway, I know your husband has an account here. Show him this thread. I'd like to speak with him.

[quote name='Zakarias.exe']I saw the E3 trailer for Halo 3 about a week ago, and it looked quite impressive. But it looks to me like Bungie is going to overmarket Halo...sure, Halo and Halo 2 are great games - even so, after playing Halo 2, it seemed like they'd changed too much in the game. The physics were different, dual-weilding was introduced...altogether it was just too much. What's next? A ******* cannon on Master Cheif's forehead? Spartan babes? Chocobos?[/quote] Yeah, excuse me if this was a joke post. If so, haha. Good one. I like the sarcasm. If not you're clearly exaggerating. At most the differences you listed are minor tweaks. Gravity was relaxed when jumping, which made the move feel more floaty. Meanwhile Halo 2 didn't exactly introduce dual-wielding into first person shooters. That's been around for years and it did nothing to really change the face of the game. The single player campaign was basically [b]identical[/b] to the first game's. Also, I fail to see how Microsoft can "overmarket" their key franchise, and how that's relevant to making extremely minor tweaks. Unless you're referring to them showing a teaser trailer at a gaming expo. In that case, I don't know what to tell you. Regardless, I'll say this again--at some point Bungie is going to have to take some risks and evolve the game. The formula's basic, but it's received praise because of how well-executed the fundamentals are. As the years go by and standards rise they're going to have to step it up. I'm sure Bungie realizes this so you had better brace yourself if you consider the things you've mentioned here, drastic.

[quote name='SkyBlu][SIZE=1']Repetitive gameplay wasn't so much an issue with Halo: Combat Evolved. It's still fun to play. But Halo 2 was plagued with it. Levels that repeated the most was the levels where there Master Chief is in High Charity. All the corridors look exactly the same, the same enemies are in each room, and you couldn't really hear Cortana telling you what's going on, which means you're being led somewhere, but you don't know where or why.[/SIZE][/quote] Um, I'm sorry, but you just described the first Halo as well since Halo 2 plays pretty much exactly like it, warts and all.

'Sup Firestorm. The Halo 3 teaser was all right. It went for a minimalist approach which is what I was expecting. It's difficult to comment on anything specifically because the only point of the teaser was to give the game a presence at the show. It didn't really showcase the actual gameplay at all. What I'm hoping for is for Bungie to resolve the issues that have been plaguing the series since its inception: poor level design, repetitive gameplay, and a terrible narrative. Hopefully they address those issues and deliver another solid multiplayer experience. They definitely need to shake things up gameplay-wise though.

[quote name='Avenged666fold']Well ok I admit Re4 is prolly the least scary "horror" game I have ever played. But I haven't played a single scary horror game at all. I always liked action games. So re1 and 3 ewere boring imo. But 2 and 4(I cheated in 2 so I had enough ammoo and I could save) were fun beacuse they were pretty much action packed and really run. So trding in the "fear factor" for fun gameplay is a + in my book.[/quote] Wow, that's strange. I always thought Resident Evil 3: Nemesis was more action oriented than Resident Evil 2.

[QUOTE=Cygnus X-1][COLOR=Sienna] So essentially what you're saying is they turned it into an action game... which was really what I was saying. The game itself was fairly entertaining, but it just didn't seem like a Resident Evil game to me. It was arcady and flashy but just not the same thing. I can see where you're coming from, though, and the series was due for a bit of change, but I would have prefered another cinimatic-style RE game to what we got in RE4. To each their own, as they say.[/color][/quote] Well, yes, I very much agree with you. In some ways I thought the game did feel shallow by giving into its action approach a little too much. On the other hand, the game was also more cinematic than something like, say--Kingdom Hearts 2. It didn't rely on a countless barrage of cut scenes to make it cinematic. That's the easy way out. The camera angle, atmospheric environments, sound, and enemy behavior gave the game a natural cinematic feel that many games lack. It was just a very immersive experience that didn't force anything on me, like pointless, out-of-place puzzles. During a session of Resident Evil 4 it would be easy for me to forget I was playing the game. In that way, it was like a really good movie. The best films pull the viewer in and make them feel like they're visiting another world. I felt that way watching the Lord of The Rings films, for example. In that way Resident Evil 4 was successful in ways that its predecessors were not. By turning the game into an action game, Capcom was just delivering a different kind of tension. Instead of relying on "shock scares" to establish a theme of horror, they made the player feel as though they were constantly facing an onslaught of rabid killers. I thought it was very visceral. There was room for improvement, but it was a nice foundation to build upon. I would have preferred less ammo and more fleeing, like what we see early on in the town, but the game was fun regardless. I would, however, like Capcom to give more attention to the cut scenes next time and develop the characters more realistically. Both the Japanese and American versions of the games have always placed a strong emphasis on telling a story; the plot is an integral part of the series no matter what version you're playing. Resident Evil 4 would have been more effective if I actually saw Ashley and Leon as a real people and cared about their well-being. So, if Capcom is able to establish a better sense of direction and polish up their dialogue next time around, I'll be pleased.

[quote name='SkyBlu][SIZE=1']A problem with the Res Evil series isn't the cameras or the controls. It's the plot and how it's executed. There's so much stuff going on in and around Racoon City and the games jump around on the timeline it's quite easy to get confused and lost[/SIZE][/quote] Well, there were several problems including the camera and controls. The primary issue was that Capcom "went to the well" one too many times and the formula became stale. The camera and control scheme worked well when the series was introduced--and they were implemented with careful consideration. I understand that the camera was supposed to intensify the experience by restricting the player's view and I also accept that the controls felt unnatural and burdensome in order to intensify the survival horror experience. Capcom could get away with those tricks early on because they really pioneered the survival horror genre. Sure, games like Alone in the Dark preceded Resident Evil, but Capcom really defined it and set a precedent. As time went on they got all the mileage they could out of the formula. Resident Evil 2 and 3 on the PSX did a fine job of perfecting what they established in the first place. And then Code Veronica came along and while I enjoyed it, it was at that point that I could feel the series becoming stagnant. When I played through Resident Evil Zero and found myself pushing boxes and finding cranks, I immediately shut the game off and traded it in. See, the same old crap just got really tired and I just couldn't take it anymore. Resident Evil 4 was refreshing because it got with the times. The developers had the luxury of taking as much time as they needed to begin and scrap the project several times until they got it just right. Ultimately they went with a new direction that was in many ways a departure for the series. I thought the mechanics were still somewhat archaic (no strafing or walking while shooting) but the general principle is very important. If more developers would re-invent their aging series then the market wouldn't be cluttered with so much crap.

[quote name='Pixie_rich']If i knew how I contracted it do you not think I would have avoided it in the first place you fool?[/quote] LOL. Just what I expected from a joke account. You're unable to answer any detailed inquiries about your "condition" because you lack the imagination needed to fabricate it. I hope you've had your fun with this. By the way, I'll bet that you're the same person as your spam-partner Prick Wizard. Even the join dates match. Not everyone here was born yesterday. The only thing you've been diagnosed with is a case of--fraud. [quote name='ashwolf']I have to say that some of the *ahem* responses on this thread are immature and very disrespectful. [/quote] Hey, contact me via private message. I have cheap insurance plans and some prime real-estate I can sell you.

[quote name='Pixie_rich']hey resurrected thanks for the support.....do you think you could make me a banner with a pixie on saying PIXIE_RICH>AIDS or something? :animesmil[/quote] So, how did you "contract HIV?" I'd like to know.

[quote name='Hanabishi Recca']Wasn't RE the first place to mentoin zombies in a game?[/quote] [CENTER][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/75/Zombies_Ate_My_Neighbors_box.jpg/200px-Zombies_Ate_My_Neighbors_box.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]

[QUOTE=Desbreko][color=#4B0082]As I understand it, the only difference between the $500 version and the $600 version is the size of the hard drive. The first will have a 20 GB drive and the second will have a 60 GB drive. So that extra $100 is just getting you 40 GB more storage space. Either way, though, I can tell you right now that I won't be getting a PS3 for a long, long time. Even for the $500 version, they'd have to cut the price by 2/3 before I'd consider buying one--since I'm already going to have a Wii and games to buy for that. And even if I weren't looking to get a Wii first, I just wouldn't be able to afford $500 or $600 for a console.[/color][/QUOTE] No, as I said earlier the basic package will lack WiFi, HDMI, and there will be no memory stick slot. These differences eliminate key features of the console.

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Ah, you see with the PC version you can actually move the camera much closer to the character, to the point literally of being able to go into first person perspective by scrolling the mouse wheel. For archery of course, FPP is the obvious choice, although I have been known to stick with third person in the event of being surprised by an unexpected enemy. Usually I have the camera pulled out just a fraction out, maybe two or so feet, as it gives the third person fighting advantages without sacrificing too much of the first person clarity, in fact it's often superior.[/SIZE][/quote] I'll have to give this a try. I'm on the Xbox 360 version so I don't know if it's possible, but it could be one of those things that have been there all along that I've simply been missing it. If it's there on mine I'll try it and post an update. Thanks for the tip.

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Odd, I was going to say the exact same thing about the first-person perspective, melee combat in first-person never really felt right to me, although I suppose maybe it's just because I prefer to be able to see exactly what it is I'm doing when you're controlling with a keyboard and mouse.[/SIZE][/quote] It's interesting that you should say so. The camera pulls back so far in third person view that it's hard for me to discern what exactly is going on. Plus, there's the stiff, awkward-looking animation to consider along with the fact that the controls feel extremely floaty. When you're in first person mode the floaty controls aren't a huge problem since you get a much better vantage point but when the camera is pulled back I can't tell what the hell is going on. It's just obvious from the limited mobility of the character that the game was made to be played in first person mode. But, I'm glad that there are at least some people who enjoy third-person combat. Maybe as a result they will improve it in the future. Hopefully they will make it feel more like you're controlling a real person.

I like Oblivion a lot. I tried Morrowind on the Xbox and hated it, but Oblivion does a really good job of offering a streamlined open-ended adventure. It's never unclear where you're supposed to go, and it's usually easy to get there quickly. Sometimes I lose interest in a game because I don't have the time for it, put it down for a while, and have a hard time getting back into it when I pick it up again. With Oblivion, that's not the case--it's easy to jump right back in. Oblivion probably pulls off the non-linear "living world" better than most games I've played. The artificial intelligence leaves a little to be desired; the "Radient AI" isn't quite as revolutionary as I'd hoped. But, it's a nice start. And, although the conversations people get into are extremely simplistic, and other games (like Pyschonauts) have done it better, they still add a lot to the game. I like being able to listen to conversations between random people, and drawing from them new topics and quests. So, I like how intuitive and free the game feels. I was also impressed with how polished the general experience was. Because it's such a massive title, I expected a lot of glitches. Although there are occasional glitches, they usually aren't too bad. So, yeah, the game feels really deep and immersive. It's definitely one of the only next-generation games I feel is truly worth the $60 price tag simply because there's so much to do, it's unlikely I'll ever even experience it all. If in the next one they make the people behave more realistically, and they make it plausible to use the third person perspective, I'll be happy.

It's extremely simple and unarguable. Aeris didn't really know the real Cloud; she knew a facsimile of Zack. Tifa on the other hand, knew and cared for the true Cloud. Therefore, the answer is obvious: Tifa.