thepixiesrock

At least I already have five STDs. How many do YOU have?

Krookie thinks this game is terrifying.

Wow, I'm so mad right now. I sold all of my property and shops just before I left my house Sunday. I could have had a weeks worth of money saved up when I play the game this weekend. Crap.

I'd like to tell everyone that they are jerks, and it's not ok to have these thoughts and think you aren't a jerk by thinking them. Because you totally are : (

Gee, I'm glad there are no stalkers on this board. JEALOUS MUCH?

So, do you still make money when the game is off? I didn't really understand that. Like, I don't have the game up at college with me so am I making money right now, or does the game have to be on for me to make money?

OHHHHHH ZING I'm so out of the loop now. What happened to me. : (

FABLE 2

I've been to the city she lives in, and can confirm she's a girl. I've seen her walking around. The rumors you've heard were true, she really used to be a stripper.

Hey guys, come to my house so we can co-op Fable 2.

Wow way to freak out you noob.

I'm 50% Hungarian.

How did you reach that conclusion? Most music is crap, most movies are crap, most books are crap, most everything done by people is crap. Why would games be any different? I don't know about the other things, but most music is actually good. I mean, right, we've just gotten down to the root of subjectivity, but most music is good. It depends on how you evaluate it I guess, like, if you evaluate it on how much you like it, sure a lot of music is crap, but if you evaluate it on how it uses the different aspects of music, or how it doens't use them, and to what effect, and what intent, then yeah, most music is actually good. But more to your point, I wouldn't mind betting everything on the assumption that the gap between what the worst a game can be, and the average, is much larger than what the best a game could be given the circumstances, and the average. I don't know how either of us can argue this, but it's what I think.

We're talking about average here, not median. There's a difference, just because five is in the middle doesn't mean most games are going to be five. Most games are going to be good, above a five. No. Ask a kid whether he prefers the latest Harry Potter book or flick vs Crime and Punishment or The Seventh Seal, and you get pretty much the same result. Following that argument only leads to the conclusion that game reviewers have the degree of refinement in their criteria of a five year-old - which I suspect isn't what you were trying to prove. Right, I didn't mean to imply a certain age by what I said. I just meant someone who didn't grow up with the game. I guess I said kid in the more abstract sense, where it's a person younger than the other person, like from a different time. Older person vs. younger person.

I mean, the problem is that if they rated games extremely exclusively like some people want, then how do you compare them to games later on? So take a great game from ten years ago and give it a ten out of ten. But what about now ten years later? Is it still worth that? I mean, how could it be, games have advanced so far. If you made a game exactly like that game ten years ago today, it wouldn't get a ten out of ten. How could it? Graphics, gameplay, voice acting, storylines, cutscenes, all of this type of stuff has progressed since ten years ago. So how could you possibly say that that game ten years ago deserves a ten out of ten, or even a nine out of ten if you're one of those "no ten exists" people. Wait, what's that? The game was fantastic for it's time? Given what it was working with, and what it was competing against, it was near perfect? It was, the best at what it did relative to a lot of factors. If they rate games they way they do now, it does kind of devalue the system of rating games, but it makes it easier to tell what good games will be if you're looking to buy a new game right now. I mean, give a kid who didn't grow up with your old games the choice of your old game, or a new game. your old game they rated a nine back when it was almost impossible to get that rating, or a new game that they gave a nine or ten "undeservingly" The kid is going to pick the new game, because your old games suck. Face it. They were great for you because you grew up on them, but when it comes down to it, old games just aren't as good as new games, and will never be. They are great to you because you saw what it was, what games were when it came out. You still rate the game a ten because it was the best at what it did given it's circumstances. Ten years from now, new games won't stand up either, except to people that were gaming when they came out. This is all ignoring the fact that people like different things in their games. So while you may value one thing highly, other might not, and while you hated this feature, someone else could have loved it.

Yeah, everyone needs to stop being pricks and just deal with the fact that people like games they don't.

Freaking crap. I went to bed with a whore, and then she robbed me of $5,000. If this game isn't a metaphor for my real love life, I don't know what is.

Shut up.

As mentioned, I wanted to have more fed-ex smuggler missions.

Calm down, I'm just messing around with you.

You don't have to get so upset because you made a mistake. It's ok.

That isn't the next major Bioware series. It's an already established one. It doesn't fit the criteria for your own scenerio.

About ten steps above the original. That thing looked like crap

I didn't know people that developed star wars galaxies were developing Knights of the Oblivion Republic