Me thinks I shall be dropping by the bakery counter at Vons this week and picking up a black forest cake.

Just got back from dinner with the parents. Aunt made cupcake sized chocolate cheesecakes for desert (so much for the diet) and the were delicious. I had two.

Were they delicious and moist?

Few hundred dollars because you don't have a console anymore? This game is like $60, right? Unless I missed something.

Did you try Reach? Much more epic. ODST was meh but really fun.

Dollars = hours?

maybe. time does = money.

I can't say I miss not having halo 3 after the first two on the original xbox. sure it would have been fun but not enough to affix me to a console.

I really tried to get back into gaming a couple of years ago when my sister gave me an Xbox 360 and a copy of Halo 3. Just couldn't make it work. There's only one way to do an FPS, and that's with a mouse and keyboard. I've been able to make the leap from the ole' cursor keys to WASD, but this thumbstick business is just bullshit.


Ah well. It's a hell of a good video playback device.

I went from crappy on a controller and good on a keyboard to awesome on a controller and decent on a keyboard, you get used to it.

Halo was epic for it's time, Halo 2 was long and boring. Halo 3 was prettier and the story was better, Try ODST and Reach, they're fun. Especially the rocket packs in Reach.

Yes, you are missing something.

I did try Reach but didn't think it was as good as the first two. I believe ODST is only for Live (I may be wrong) but since all five of my 360's are banned I'll never get a chance.

As far as console vs computer - I still play all my stuff on console (or I just fire up one of my arcade machines). I don't care about the graphics that much and enjoy using a joystick vs keyboard. Actually, I've never played a modern FPS on a computer so I may not know what I am talking about. The last FPS I played on a computer was in 1997 when I played Quake 2. I would try some computer games now (in fact I have Painkiller sitting over here now to check out) but I don't have the CPU/GPU to play anything modern.


http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image/...17717_640w.gif

http://www.videogamecritic.net/image...nd_dragons.png

If you don't mind me asking, how did you get banned from Xbox live? I didn't even think that was possible with some of the retards on there.

I'm still awaiting Duke Nukem Forever, I still have a few mags that talked about it back in '97... Man, I'm one loyal person to wait this long.

Microsoft doesn't seem so evil for banning modded 360s.

Sony hunts you down personally and sues you.

http://gizmodo.com/#!5770473/ps3-hac...-will-stop-him

Yeah, gameplay.

Honestly, some of the best videogames I've ever seen were nothing more than a couple of glowing squares moving around the screen or, at best, some coarse, low-resolution bitmapped sprites (or some coarse, high-resolution vectors).

Pretty graphics and huge, immersive worlds just don't do anything for me. I'm not saying it's bad thing for a game to look pretty, only that there seems to come a point when making the game's universe large and beautiful starts to take precedence over making a game simple to learn and easy to enjoy.



Well, there are some games (or some genres, perhaps) that just seem to be made for controller-based or joystick-based input. I do have a physical USB gamepad that I use when I'm running MAME or Nestopia. Most of those titles have a very simply control scheme. You can move in two axis on a flat map (either up/down/left/right or front/back/left/right), and generally have just one or two "other" functions. Ie: Jump, maybe shoot a weapon, and that's about it.

But there are other games, mostly those employing a first-person perspective which feature the ability to "look around" at the environment as a separate task from moving through the environment, where I find the mouse to be the most natural input method.

And of course, I think that these games are getting far too complicated. I don't want to have to have a printed chart next to be describing the four hundred different actions I can perform with various combinations of button presses. Frankly, it doesn't bother me that Samus' gun never runs out of ammo, and I've never thought that the experience of playing Metroid would be enhanced if I had to remember to load a new clip every fifteen shots.

Personal opinion: stop trying to make videogames realistic. I want to play then to have fun, not to accurately simulate, in every detail, the life of any real-world individual. I mean, in Call of Duty 6, are you going to have to remember to shave, cook breakfast, dig a latrine, have the corpsman check out that weird growth on your leg, and attend sexual harassment training?


Fuck it. Just give me a glowing dot to shoot at, and maybe a "boop" sound when I hit it.



Haha. I also have a copy of Painkiller sitting here awaiting me. Haven't really been motivated to try it.




That's actually a pretty good movie. It's called Der Untergang (Downfall). It's about life inside the bunker during the final days of the European campaign, and it rather interestingly emphasizes the point of view of a lot of the non-military personnel- secretaries, office workers, the wives and children of high-ranking officers, etc.

EO/PoSH training right there in the video game, nice! Are you also going to have to study for and attend a virtual promotion board before you can advance in the game? I could imagine some 11 y/o kid sweating getting grilled by a panel made of virtual Sergeants Major. :D

I like how in your example there are Navy personnel at the same COP/PB where Soldiers are having to dig their own latrines and cook their own breakfasts. :bowrofl:

ODST has a decent campaign, they all do. Better than 2, shorter and probably a little better than 3. Not as epic as jump packing through Reach.

Just under 11 hours now. EEEEE! I'm like an over-excited boy on christmas eve.

Anybody know of any midnight releases? Best Buy, game stop?

Just get it on steam?

5 hours

http://www.aperturescience.com/glados@home/