Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

X-COM UFO Defense. It's old and looks like crap on my machine, but it's a damn fun and challenging game.

It's great to play while we wait for X-COM Enemy Unknown.

They were good at the time when standards were lower.

Looking back at them now, they're a glitchy, imbalanced mess. Do you really want to go back to the day where psychic types mindlessly dominated everything and stuff like Wrap and Fire Spin cheaply nailed other Pokemon if they were spammed enough times? Or how about the way some of those sprites looked totally ridiculous and the way the inventory bag lacked any kind of organization to it whatsoever?

For obvious reasons, I feel the newer games are way better.

Saints Row.

I tried GTA4 and was bored with it very quickly. Same with L.A. Noire, which is in that same kind of category. Meanwhile, Saints Row 2 and 3 were a blast from start to finish, and it doesn't take itself seriously. The humor and customization features are great, and it's really the only game where you can act like a fool and still be badass at the same time.

I liked the first Borderlands game, but I think I'm going to wait on this. Steam may knock the price down quite a bit during the holiday season. I got Max Payne 3 for only $30 during a recent sale, and that was a pretty great deal.

I'm going to miss Brick though. Having him go apeshit with his fists will be sorely missed.

Let's see, other words for "theory" include:

Assumption
Guess
Speculation
...and many others.

How many times have words like these been used and ended up being used in a context where the thing they were being applied to was wrong?

Don't get me wrong, science is a handy tool at times, but it sure gets pretty lofty with some of these theories.

Fallout by far.

I tried both Oblivion and Skyrim, and didn't really get into either of them. All of the weapons in Elder Scrolls felt weak and exploring areas wasn't nearly as rewarding. A cave or tomb you spent hours exploring and plenty of time fighting through tough enemies gave you virtually nothing for an upgrade or anything even remotely interesting. However, Fallout had some pretty kickass weapons, great themes, great music, and had WAY, WAY more humor to it. And it rewarded you generously for scavenging around and killing tough enemies. Elder Scrolls just seemed so stiff and serious, tightfisted on the rewards, and spammed booby traps all over the damn place. Sure, Fallout has plenty of booby traps, but not to the ridiculous amount that Oblivion and Skyrim had.

Sonic 3, Casino Night Zone Act 2. Bascially, there's a spinning cylinder thing there and it almost looks like you're stuck and supposed to jump on it to push it down while it keeps wanting to bounce back in place and then hope to slip through an extremely narrow passage under it. It's an extremely frustrating part, and they give you no indication you can just press up and down to shift it far more effectively while mounted on it.

Also, Final Fantasy Tactics, Riovanes Castle Part 2 and 3. Both parts were so insanely hard. You could lose during Part 3's battle before you even had the chance to act if Rafa (an horrendously weak NPC) made the wrong move, and her dying instantly meant game over.

Besides those, obviously accidentally overwriting save files.

I like Max Payne. Just seems like he always gets into the worst kinds of situations trying to do the right thing, and in the end, it's realistic that often the road to hell for him is paved with good intentions. No one ever said it was going to be easy, and I feel Max Payne games are fun, even on the second and third playthrough despite their linear approach.

Meanwhile, Max Payne 3 is fantastic. I was a bit worried they'd screw up the series, but while they made it somewhat different in approach to the first two games, it was still great.

I've never busted anything over rage. At worst, I'll say things like "that's a lot of crap" or "what the hell" to myself. And every now and then, if things just go from bad to worse, I'll just quit and try again later. And I notice most of this occurs while playing with other people online and it's simply clear they've been playing longer than I have or just have an incredible reaction time that I don't. For that, I appreciate KillCams. There are times when I really wonder how the hell someone killed me, and watching the KillCam usually does help it make more sense. To you, it make seem like they shot you through a wall, but then you watch the KillCam and see your head was sticking out a bit, or they nailed you just a second before you made it to cover.

At 9/12/12 08:39 AM, Shade wrote: For me it's Duke Nukem. I honestly don't see why everyone hated it so much, I found it quite enjoyable.

Same. Given, it wasn't nearly as good as Duke Nukem 3D, but it had its moments. Finding the ever-spinning top from Inception in Duke's dream was one of those. And hey, it was better than never getting anything at all, which almost happened. I understand why people were disappointed and wanted something more, but it didn't deserve so much hate.

I foresee either CoD: World at War 2, or them saying to hell with it and just doing Black Ops 3 only a year later anyway.

Or, they could do something new (though I doubt it) and do a post-apocalyptic setting featuring the same kind of fare you'd get from Fallout, Borderlands, and so on, or go with future warfare, which would probably be more likely. But knowing them, I have a feeling there will be another sequel to a series that already exists.

I've had mine taken out years ago. All four were coming in sideways, so yeah, those had to be out of there. First few days were a bloody and painful mess, then my mouth was swollen, and then it was over within a week's time.

Playing CSS and BF2. And finally getting my undergraduate degree.

At 1 hour ago, WeHaveFreshCookies wrote: You're overreacting, but I agree to a point. I spot everybody that I see. But I also try to kill everybody I see. Although on Sunday, I saw a teammate about to knife somebody, and I railed the guy with a tank shell. The message I got soon after was HILARIOUS.

If there's any risk or chance a knife attempt may screw up or make me lose out of a kill because of hubris, I usually don't go for it. I don't do it unless the guy is very distracted, we're alone, he's not moving, and he's in close proximity. Those cases are rare, so yes, my collection of dog tags isn't much. There's no worse feeling than getting killed by a guy that you could have killed if only you had struck first with a gun, or get killed by one of his friends because you felt going for the knife kill was more important than actually paying attention to your surroundings.

As long as you're confident you'll like it for a nice long time, go for it. But if there's any chance it's just a phase, think twice.

Personally, if I were to get a Pokemon tattoo, I'd go for Lugia. Most people wouldn't recognize it unless they were fans and actually played the games.

At 2/3/12 04:11 PM, Luis wrote: also some people didnt break their fonts. noobz.

Almost done tho.

Yeah, I just realized I overlooked a few text parts. The big ones I got, but it's always the damn little ones I end up overlooking.

If it helps any:

-FLA-

I feel the need to know more before making an appropriate call on this, such as the size of the knife, what exactly happened during the confrontation, what kinds of actions the police tried before exercising lethal force, and what kind of injury was inflicted with the knife before the shots were fired. But at the moment, working with the limited information I have, I think both parties are in the wrong.

1. What kind of knife was used? There's a big difference between a "butter knife" and a chef's knife. A butter knife would have been a cinch to take care of, but a chef's knife, not so much.

2. What was the extent of the injury? Was it inflicted because of a failed attempt to disarm and remove the knife from the kid's grasp?

3. What options did the police consider before exercising lethal force, and how soon and how effectively were they made?

The parents should have done something to ensure knives or other dangerous objects wouldn't end up in the hands of the kid, especially if he had this much of an extensive history of attacks and aggressive behavior. Expecting the police to swing by and give the kid the "regular stunning" on a typical basis is just ludicrous, something should have been done to control this kid and ensure these kinds of attacks were minimized and posed the least amount of danger if and when they happened.

In terms of the police, I feel they should have been able to overpower a 15 year old kid, and that shooting him is a pretty extreme option that was very likely unwarranted given the situation. Without a doubt, the two officers working together should have been able to not only disarm the kid, but keep him suppressed long enough to at least put him in handcuffs to keep him under control.

At 2/1/12 05:41 PM, StalkerGuy wrote: oh fuck. I'd like to make a part but I just saw this now, the redesign is in 4 days, maybe I could pm you a file after the thread get's locked, if I manage to finish the part. Or maybe it's too late.

Deadline's tomorrow, but I suppose you could pull an all nighter and still get it in before the deadline. If you're game for that, great, but if you'd rather not, well, better luck next time.

I sent this to Luis already, but if people are curious, this is what I cooked up.

SWF

I know, it has a goofy Advance Wars: Dual Strike reference, but I thought it worked out great, even if you know nothing about that game.

Everybody's parts are great, nice job, guys.

It's just a casual and easy to get into game with funny characters, sound effects, and cartoonish level designs. So what if the fling something to destroy something gameplay mechanic has been done before? Need we remind you of how many games have the unoriginal context of being a first person shooter?

Don't be such a whiner and a hater.

At 1/23/12 07:42 AM, RedHarvest wrote: just doesnt feel like there's that many collabs running anymore - -

I think the main reason is because people would love to be a part of a collab, but they don't want to be the one that starts and leads the entire thing. People have been rather sheepish about hosting collabs lately.

Also, sorry to say, but most of the ideas you've suggested, like Star Wars and Mortal Kombat, have been done many times before. Truckloads of parodies already exist for them, and they've covered just about everything. You might want to think of something that is a little more fresh. The recent Skyrim collab was a good example of a successful collab cashing in on something popular and new. Probably would have done even better if the collab host allowed a bit more time for people to make parts and for more people to join in, but that was up to them.

Either that, or go into uncovered ground. Haven't seen a collab (or even a standalone Flash for that matter) based on Fallout, yet I'm sure that would be popular. Mass Effect and Arkham City/Asylum are possibilities as well. Or, if basing it on video games isn't really your thing, there's recent and upcoming movie franchises that could be done. I'm sure you could find quite a bit to do on Pirates of the Caribbean or the upcoming The Hobbit movie.

Again, I really think it's the nervousness of starting the collab or they're too busy to do it that's holding people back, because countless ideas are out there and can easily be done well, and people are always posting them in here. It's just that no one wants to be the guy that can't start new collabs any more because their first one was a flop and now everyone looks down on them. We just need more people to try and forget about what happens if it doesn't work out.

At 1/22/12 10:51 AM, kmau wrote: But roleplaying also involves you making choices (outside of distributing stats and equipment), and that is not given in linear shooters, sports games etc. Controlling an avatar does not equal roleplaying as him/her as long as you don't make choices for him.

The ability to make storyline-impacting choices doesn't define an RPG either. In Final Fantasy games, the storyline is very linear and ends up being the same despite the dialogue options you pick or what sub-quests you do along the way. The ending usually ends up being exactly the same either way. And you'd have a lot of fan boys on your ass if you said Final Fantasy wasn't a true RPG.

Also, there's plenty of non-RPG games that involve making choices that actually affect the storyline and ending. Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid both have instances where you're left with the choice to save certain characters and whether or not they appear in the ending based on these decisions. Starcraft II also has a few instances like this, but that's always been a real time strategy game.

At 1/22/12 10:37 AM, kmau wrote: Roleplaying is not defined by the gameplay or genre.

It was typically implied as a turn based game years ago. When you get down to it, role-playing just means taking on the likeness of a character and taking command of a character that's someone besides yourself, which could apply to any game. In a first person shooter, you're role-playing as a soldier. In a sports game, you're role-playing as an athlete. It's a pretty loose term.

Usually I find a franchise turning into an MMO typically ends up being the deathblow to any continuity to it. Instead it turns the entire franchise world into a character building amusement park where all instances are just like rides and attractions, and barely a damn is given about long-term storyline anymore. In the meantime, you play a character that starts off as a nobody and stays a nobody in the whole scheme of things, no matter what quests or missions they do. They never become a true part of the lore of the game, no matter how much or how little they accomplish. Meanwhile, the setting is never impacted by your actions either, whereas in single player experiences, your character is capable of influencing major changes.

In all honestly, MMOs are never about the story. To me, they're purely social games which can be fun with other people, but that's all they'll really be. An MMO played as a single player experience is just downright awful.

Yeah, I've been feeling this way lately as well.

When RPGs stopped being turn based and strategy based, I really didn't think of them in terms of being RPGs anymore. I always thought RPGs would be more like board games where sides take a turn and can only perform so many actions in that one turn before they had to let the other side go (like Final Fantasy 7 or Final Fantasy Tactics). I liked it better this way rather than have the messy task of trying to manage and command multiple characters or units in real time (which is more of a real time strategy game to me). Imagine how much crap chess or checkers would be if that was done in real time as well and everyone had as many moves as they'd like.

Now, it just feels like RPGs are more like platformers with character stats, or more like first person shooters with stats (like Fallout 3). Sometimes you're given a party, but the single character you're currently commanding is the only one that has any real worth. And instead of thinking strategically about what move or ability to use next for each character, you're mashing buttons just to spam as many attacks as you can for the most damage.

Are RPGs really too proud to go back to turn-based gameplay?

I've been trying to find a really good loud and angry metal songs. So far, the best I've been able to get so far is People = Shit by Slipknot, but I'm wondering if there's something out there that's louder and angrier-sounding than that.

What do you guys have?

Duke Nukem 3D. But Half Life 2 gets honorable mention.

At 1/17/12 04:07 PM, cmkinusn wrote: He isn't going to add you to a list, try to reserve this thread for questions, saying you will join is just spamming

Not really. It does give Luis some kind of estimation as to how many parts he may get. Sure, not everyone who says they're joining is going to get around to doing a part or they may give up along the line, but if he sees a lot of people interested and saying they'll submit something, he'll know what to expect.

But yeah, I know he's definitely not going to wait on anyone once the deadline hits.

Storyline was trippy and probably had too many plot twists for its own good, but it was still a highly decent game. It was a pretty original idea and the music was outstanding as well.

Definitely needs a sequel.

At least 15 seconds or not over 15 seconds? I have a great idea in mind, but it'll probably go over a bit.